IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v97y2018icp41-50.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Use of revealed preference data to estimate the costs of forest carbon sequestration in Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Murphy, Rose
  • Gross, Dominique M.
  • Jaccard, Mark

Abstract

Estimates of the costs of forest carbon sequestration can guide policy makers in determining the level of effort to place on achieving this form of greenhouse gas emissions mitigation. The Canadian literature on the costs of forest carbon sequestration is dominated by what is known as the bottom-up engineering method. Generally speaking, this approach relies on values observed in markets to estimate land opportunity costs. An alternative is the econometric method, which can capture other potential influences on the behavior of landowners, as revealed by historical data. To our knowledge, there are currently no studies that apply the econometric method to Canada; this may be because detailed land-use data over time is not available. We identified a database compiled by the Canadian Forest Service and used it to estimate an econometric model of afforestation in Ontario. Simulations were conducted from the estimated equation under a range of conditions. The results suggest that carbon sequestration at a given cost could be much lower than indicated by Canadian bottom-up studies. The simulations also demonstrate that, if afforestation is encouraged by awarding offset credits, low carbon prices could result in an unacceptably high share of those credits going to non-additional projects – ones that would have been carried out anyway.

Suggested Citation

  • Murphy, Rose & Gross, Dominique M. & Jaccard, Mark, 2018. "Use of revealed preference data to estimate the costs of forest carbon sequestration in Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 41-50.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:97:y:2018:i:c:p:41-50
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2018.06.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138993411730607X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.06.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yemshanov, Denys & McCarney, Geoffrey R. & Hauer, Grant & Luckert, M.K. (Marty) & Unterschultz, Jim & McKenney, Daniel W., 2015. "A real options-net present value approach to assessing land use change: A case study of afforestation in Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 327-336.
    2. McKenney, Daniel W. & Yemshanov, Denys & Fox, Glenn & Ramlal, Elizabeth, 2004. "Cost estimates for carbon sequestration from fast growing poplar plantations in Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 345-358, June.
    3. Ruben N. Lubowski & Andrew J. Plantinga & Robert N. Stavins, 2008. "What Drives Land-Use Change in the United States? A National Analysis of Landowner Decisions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(4), pages 529-550.
    4. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Sohngen, Brent, 2007. "Economics of Forest Ecosystem Carbon Sinks: A Review," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 1(3), pages 237-269, September.
    5. Lubowski, Ruben N. & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Stavins, Robert N., 2006. "Land-use change and carbon sinks: Econometric estimation of the carbon sequestration supply function," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 135-152, March.
    6. Beach, Robert H. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Yang, Jui-Chen & Murray, Brian C. & Abt, Robert C., 2005. "Econometric studies of non-industrial private forest management: a review and synthesis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 261-281, March.
    7. Denys Yemshanov & Daniel W. McKenney & Terry Hatton & Glenn Fox, 2005. "Investment Attractiveness of Afforestation in Canada Inclusive of Carbon Sequestration Benefits," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(4), pages 307-323, December.
    8. G. Cornelis van Kooten & Louise M. Arthur & W. R. Wilson, 1992. "Potential to Sequester Carbon in Canadian Forests: Some Economic Considerations," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 18(2), pages 127-138, June.
    9. Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2000. "Climate Change and Forest Sinks: Factors Affecting the Costs of Carbon Sequestration," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 211-235, November.
    10. Yemshanov, Denys & McKenney, Daniel & Fraleigh, Saul & D'Eon, Steve, 2007. "An integrated spatial assessment of the investment potential of three species in southern Ontario, Canada inclusive of carbon benefits," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1-2), pages 48-59, December.
    11. Douglas J. Miller, 1999. "An Econometric Analysis of the Costs of Sequestering Carbon in Forests," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(4), pages 812-824.
    12. Robert N. Stavins, 1999. "The Costs of Carbon Sequestration: A Revealed-Preference Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 994-1009, September.
    13. Sun, Changyou, 2007. "Variation of federal cost-share programs in the United States and the inducement effects on tree planting," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 279-296, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yemshanov, Denys & McCarney, Geoffrey R. & Hauer, Grant & Luckert, M.K. (Marty) & Unterschultz, Jim & McKenney, Daniel W., 2015. "A real options-net present value approach to assessing land use change: A case study of afforestation in Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 327-336.
    2. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Sohngen, Brent, 2007. "Economics of Forest Ecosystem Carbon Sinks: A Review," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 1(3), pages 237-269, September.
    3. Adetoye, Ayoade Matthew & Okojie, Luke O. & Akerele, Dare, 2018. "Forest carbon sequestration supply function for African countries: An econometric modelling approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 59-66.
    4. Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen & Jin, Yan, 2022. "Understanding planting preferences – A case-study of the afforestation choices of farmers in Ireland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    5. Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "The Evolution Of Environmental Economics: A View From The Inside," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 62(02), pages 251-274, June.
    6. Taeyoung Kim & Christian Langpap, 2015. "Incentives for Carbon Sequestration Using Forest Management," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(3), pages 491-520, November.
    7. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Laaksonen-Craig, Susanna & Wang, Yichuan, 2007. "Costs of Creating Carbon Offset Credits via Forestry Activities: A Meta-Regression Analysis," Working Papers 37039, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    8. Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen, 2018. "Heterogeneous economic and behavioural drivers of the Farm afforestation decision," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 63-74.
    9. Zhen Xu & Carolyn E. Smyth & Tony C. Lemprière & Greg J. Rampley & Werner A. Kurz, 2018. "Climate change mitigation strategies in the forest sector: biophysical impacts and economic implications in British Columbia, Canada," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 257-290, February.
    10. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Eagle, Alison J. & Manley, James G. & Smolak, Tara M., 2004. "How Costly Are Carbon Offsets? A Meta-Analysis Of Carbon Forest Sinks," Working Papers 18166, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    11. Michetti, Melania & Rosa, Renato, 2012. "Afforestation and timber management compliance strategies in climate policy. A computable general equilibrium analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 139-148.
    12. Im, Eun Ho & Adams, Darius M. & Latta, Gregory S., 2007. "Potential impacts of carbon taxes on carbon flux in western Oregon private forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 1006-1017, May.
    13. Kim, Man-Keun & Peralta, Denis & McCarl, Bruce A., 2014. "Land-based greenhouse gas emission offset and leakage discounting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 265-273.
    14. Garnache, Cloé & Mérel, Pierre R. & Lee, Juhwan & Six, Johan, 2017. "The social costs of second-best policies: Evidence from agricultural GHG mitigation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 39-73.
    15. Oladipo S. Obembe & Nathan P. Hendricks, 2022. "Marginal cost of carbon sequestration through forest afforestation of agricultural land in the southeastern United States," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 53(S1), pages 59-73, November.
    16. Monge, Juan J. & Bryant, Henry L. & Gan, Jianbang & Richardson, James W., 2016. "Land use and general equilibrium implications of a forest-based carbon sequestration policy in the United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 102-120.
    17. Jaeger, William K. & Egelkraut, Thorsten M., 2011. "Biofuel economics in a setting of multiple objectives and unintended consequences," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4320-4333.
    18. Latta, Gregory & Adams, Darius M. & Alig, Ralph J. & White, Eric, 2011. "Simulated effects of mandatory versus voluntary participation in private forest carbon offset markets in the United States," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 127-141, April.
    19. Elena G. Irwin & Andrew M. Isserman & Maureen Kilkenny & Mark D. Partridge, 2010. "A Century of Research on Rural Development and Regional Issues," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(2), pages 522-553.
    20. Favero, Alice & Mendelsohn, Robert & Sohngen, Brent, 2016. "Carbon Storage and Bioenergy: Using Forests for Climate Mitigation," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 232215, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:97:y:2018:i:c:p:41-50. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.