IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i19p8562-d1490984.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Potential and Investment Attractiveness of Implementing Climate Projects on Disturbed Lands

Author

Listed:
  • Svetlana S. Morkovina

    (Faculty of Economics, Voronezh State University of Forestry and Technologies Named after G.F. Morozov, 8 Timiryazev Str., Voronezh 394087, Russia)

  • Nataliya V. Yakovenko

    (Faculty of Economics, Voronezh State University of Forestry and Technologies Named after G.F. Morozov, 8 Timiryazev Str., Voronezh 394087, Russia)

  • Sergey S. Sheshnitsan

    (Faculty of Economics, Voronezh State University of Forestry and Technologies Named after G.F. Morozov, 8 Timiryazev Str., Voronezh 394087, Russia)

  • Denis Kuznetsov

    (Faculty of Economics, Voronezh State University of Forestry and Technologies Named after G.F. Morozov, 8 Timiryazev Str., Voronezh 394087, Russia)

  • Anton Shashkin

    (Faculty of Economics, Voronezh State University of Forestry and Technologies Named after G.F. Morozov, 8 Timiryazev Str., Voronezh 394087, Russia)

  • Alexander Tretyakov

    (St. Petersburg Research Institute of Forestry, 21 Institutsky Ave., St. Petersburg 194021, Russia)

  • Julia Stepanova

    (Faculty of Economics, Voronezh State University of Forestry and Technologies Named after G.F. Morozov, 8 Timiryazev Str., Voronezh 394087, Russia)

Abstract

Forest restoration projects can be categorized as climate projects, investments in the implementation of which exceed the investment costs of forest-climate projects, which reduces their attractiveness to investors. An algorithm for assessing investment costs of climate reforestation projects on disturbed lands has been developed. The potential of territories for the implementation of such project initiatives is available in all regions of Russia and amounts to more than 381 thousand hectares. For five studied polygons of disturbed lands (Kuzbass basin, Moscow basin, Western Siberia basin, as well as basins of Chelyabinsk and Belgorod Regions), the aggregated costs for the implementation of measures to create carbon-depositing plantations and ground cover were calculated. Investment costs for restoration of 1 hectare of disturbed land under the climate project vary from 82.6 thousand rubles to 116.9 thousand rubles. Cost analysis shows that the carbon intensity of investment in such projects on disturbed lands is quite high (Ccii > 1.0). The highest investment potential is observed in the Kuzbass basin, where Ccii is 2.01. To organize and implement the afforestation project on disturbed lands of the Kemerovo Region, investments in the amount of 66.7 thousand rubles/ha for capital expenditures and 24.7 thousand rubles/ha for current expenses will be required. The payback period of such an investment project, taking into account the discount rate, is 13.1 years, and during the study period (20 years) the income from the project will cover 228% of the spent funds. These data confirm that the investment potential of forest-climatic projects on disturbed lands is quite high.

Suggested Citation

  • Svetlana S. Morkovina & Nataliya V. Yakovenko & Sergey S. Sheshnitsan & Denis Kuznetsov & Anton Shashkin & Alexander Tretyakov & Julia Stepanova, 2024. "Potential and Investment Attractiveness of Implementing Climate Projects on Disturbed Lands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-24, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:19:p:8562-:d:1490984
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/19/8562/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/19/8562/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Soh, Moonwon & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N., 2019. "Targeting payments for forest carbon sequestration given ecological and economic objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 214-226.
    2. Yang, Hongqiang & Li, Xi, 2018. "Potential variation in opportunity cost estimates for REDD+ and its causes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 138-146.
    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. Ming-Yun Chu & Wan-Yu Liu, 2021. "Assessing the Opportunity Cost of Carbon Stock Caused by Land-Use Changes in Taiwan," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-15, November.
    2. Alexandre Anders Brasil & Humberto Angelo & Alexandre Nascimento de Almeida & Eraldo Aparecido Trondoli Matricardi & Henrique Marinho Leite Chaves & Maristela Franchetti de Paula, 2023. "Modeling the Impacts of Soil Management on Avoided Deforestation and REDD+ Payments in the Brazilian Amazon: A Systems Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-27, August.
    3. Yvonne Hargita & Lukas Giessen & Sven Günter, 2020. "Similarities and Differences between International REDD+ and Transnational Deforestation-Free Supply Chain Initiatives—A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-33, January.
    4. Sharma, Bijay P. & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Yu, T. Edward, 2019. "Designing cost-efficient payments for forest-based carbon sequestration: An auction-based modeling approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 182-194.
    5. Ye Song & Hongjun Peng, 2019. "Strategies of Forestry Carbon Sink under Forest Insurance and Subsidies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-13, August.
    6. Sharma, Bijay P. & Cho, Seong-Hoon, 2021. "Analyzing how forest-based amenity values and carbon storage benefits affect spatial targeting for conservation investment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    7. Seong-Hoon Cho & Bijay P. Sharma, 2020. "Optimal spatial budget distribution of forest carbon payments that balances the returns and risks associated with conservation costs," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(8), pages 7239-7267, December.
    8. Lee, Young Gwan & Zhu, Gengping & Sharma, Bijay P. & English, Burton C. & Cho, Seong-Hoon, 2021. "Role of complementary and competitive relationships among multiple objectives in conservation investment decisions," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    9. Guillaume Lestrelin & Jean-Christophe Castella & Qiaohong Li & Thoumthone Vongvisouk & Nguyen Dinh Tien & Ole Mertz, 2019. "A Nested Land Uses–Landscapes–Livelihoods Approach to Assess the Real Costs of Land-Use Transitions: Insights from Southeast Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-20, January.
    10. Daniel Runfola & Geeta Batra & Anupam Anand & Audrey Way & Seth Goodman, 2020. "Exploring the Socioeconomic Co-benefits of Global Environment Facility Projects in Uganda Using a Quasi-Experimental Geospatial Interpolation (QGI) Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-13, April.
    11. Karanfil, Fatih & Pierru, Axel, 2021. "The opportunity cost of domestic oil consumption for an oil exporter: Illustration for Saudi Arabia," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    12. Graves, Rose A. & Nielsen-Pincus, Max & Haugo, Ryan D. & Holz, Andrés, 2022. "Forest carbon incentive programs for non-industrial private forests in Oregon (USA): Impacts of program design on willingness to enroll and landscape-scale program outcomes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:19:p:8562-:d:1490984. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.