IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v7y2015i4p3665-3682d47436.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Opportunity Costs of Carbon Emissions Stemming from Changes in Land Use

Author

Listed:
  • Heli Lu

    (Key Research Institute of Yellow River Civilization and Sustainable Development & Collaborative Innovation Center on Yellow River Civilization of Henan Province, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China
    Institute of Natural Resources and Environmental Science, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China
    Institute of Advanced Studies, United Nations University, Yokohama 220-8502, Japan)

  • Guifang Liu

    (Key Research Institute of Yellow River Civilization and Sustainable Development & Collaborative Innovation Center on Yellow River Civilization of Henan Province, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China
    Institute of Natural Resources and Environmental Science, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China)

Abstract

The REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) mechanism allows carbon sinks to be used as carbon credits in order to offset emissions from other sources. However, this practice has raised a number of issues relating to financial incentives. In this study, we develop a spatially explicit model for predicting carbon emissions from deforestation that meet baseline levels as well as farmers’ opportunity costs (measured in US dollars per ton of CO2e) under three temporal scenarios with several potential discount rates for agricultural income. Additionally, we use two different accounting methods recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), including the average storage method and the “ton-year approach,” to evaluate emissions reductions. We find that farmers are more likely to prefer REDD in the short-run when discount rates are higher than 10%. However, further analysis indicates that opportunity costs would increase significantly over longer periods of time (middle-term schemes of 35 years or long-term schemes of 55 years), thereby dissuading farmers from choosing REDD. Our findings highlight the drawbacks in using REDD to mitigate global climate change and conserve forests based on farmers’ financial incentives.

Suggested Citation

  • Heli Lu & Guifang Liu, 2015. "Opportunity Costs of Carbon Emissions Stemming from Changes in Land Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-18, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:4:p:3665-3682:d:47436
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/4/3665/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/4/3665/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. V. Bellassen & V. Gitz, 2008. "Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation in Cameroon - Assessing costs and benefits," Post-Print hal-00716370, HAL.
    2. Yuki Yamamoto & Kenji Takeuchi, 2012. "Estimating the break-even price for forest protection in Central Kalimantan," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 14(3), pages 289-301, July.
    3. Sedjo, Roger, 2001. "Forest Carbon Sequestration: Some Issues for Forest Investments," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-34, Resources for the Future.
    4. Marshall, Liz & Kelly, Alexia, 2010. "The Time Value of Carbon and Carbon Storage: Clarifying the terms and the policy implications of the debate," MPRA Paper 27326, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Philip Fearnside & Daniel Lashof & Pedro Moura-Costa, 2000. "Accounting for time in Mitigating Global Warming through land-use change and forestry," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 239-270, September.
    6. Bellassen, Valentin & Gitz, Vincent, 2008. "Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation in Cameroon -- Assessing costs and benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 336-344, December.
    7. José I. Barredo & Guy Engelen, 2010. "Land Use Scenario Modeling for Flood Risk Mitigation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(5), pages 1-18, May.
    8. Hunt, Colin, 2002. "Local and global benefits of subsidizing tropical forest conservation," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 325-340, May.
    9. Roger A. Sedjo & Gregg Marland, 2003. "Inter-trading permanent emissions credits and rented temporary carbon emissions offsets: some issues and alternatives," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(4), pages 435-444, December.
    10. Chomitz, Kenneth M., 2000. "Evaluating carbon offsets from forestry and energy projects," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2357, The World Bank.
    11. Sedjo, Roger A., 2001. "Forest Carbon Sequestration: Some Issues for Forest Investments," Discussion Papers 10571, Resources for the Future.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jian Peng & An Wang & Yanxu Liu & Weidong Liu, 2015. "Assessing the Atmospheric Oxygen Balance in a Region of Rapid Urbanization: A Case Study in the Pearl River Delta, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-18, September.
    2. Guifang Liu & Jie Li & Liang Ren & Heli Lu & Jingcao Wang & Yaxing Zhang & Cheng Zhang & Chuanrong Zhang, 2022. "Identification of Socio-Economic Impacts as the Main Drivers of Carbon Stocks in China’s Tropical Rainforests: Implications for REDD+," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-20, November.
    3. Qiu, Lingling & Kant, Shashi & Zeng, Weizhong, 2023. "Indigenous people's perceptions of benefits and costs of China's second phase of the grain for green program and the influencing factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).

    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. Heli Lu & Guifang Liu, 2012. "A case study of REDD+ challenges in the post‐2012 climate regime: The scenarios approach," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 36(3), pages 192-201, August.
    2. Parisa, Zack & Marland, Eric & Sohngen, Brent & Marland, Gregg & Jenkins, Jennifer, 2022. "The time value of carbon storage," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Marshall, Liz & Kelly, Alexia, 2010. "The Time Value of Carbon and Carbon Storage: Clarifying the terms and the policy implications of the debate," MPRA Paper 27326, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Cacho, Oscar J. & Milne, Sarah & Gonzalez, Ricardo & Tacconi, Luca, 2014. "Benefits and costs of deforestation by smallholders: Implications for forest conservation and climate policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 321-332.
    6. Oscar J. Cacho & Graham R. Marshall & Mary Milne, 2003. "Smallholder Agroforestry Projects: Potential for carbon sequestration and poverty alleviation," Working Papers 03-06, Agricultural and Development Economics Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO - ESA).
    7. Dang Phan, Thu-Ha & Brouwer, Roy & Davidson, Marc, 2014. "The economic costs of avoided deforestation in the developing world: A meta-analysis," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 1-16.
    8. Patrick Bottazzi & David Crespo & Harry Soria & Hy Dao & Marcelo Serrudo & Jean Paul Benavides & Stefan Schwarzer & Stephan Rist, 2014. "Carbon Sequestration in Community Forests: Trade-offs, Multiple Outcomes and Institutional Diversity in the Bolivian Amazon," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 45(1), pages 105-131, January.
    9. Sabina Shaikh & Pavel Suchánek & Lili Sun & G. Cornelis van Kooten, 2003. "Does Inclusion of Landowners’ Non-Market Values Lower Costs of Creating Carbon Forest Sinks?," Working Papers 2003-03, University of Victoria, Department of Economics, Resource Economics and Policy Analysis Research Group.
    10. Jaza Folefack, Achille Jean & Ngo Njiki, Marie Gaelle & Darr, Dietrich, 2019. "Safeguarding forests from smallholder oil palm expansion by more intensive production? The case of Ngwei forest (Cameroon)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 45-61.
    11. van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2004. "Economics of Forest and Agricultural Carbon Sinks," Working Papers 18160, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    12. Oscar J. Cacho & Robyn L. Hean & Russell M. Wise, 2003. "Carbon‐accounting methods and reforestation incentives," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(2), pages 153-179, June.
    13. Damnyag, Lawrence & Tyynelä, Tapani & Appiah, Mark & Saastamoinen, Olli & Pappinen, Ari, 2011. "Economic cost of deforestation in semi-deciduous forests — A case of two forest districts in Ghana," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2503-2510.
    14. 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.
    15. Annie Levasseur & Pascal Lesage & Manuele Margni & Miguel Brandão & Réjean Samson, 2012. "Assessing temporary carbon sequestration and storage projects through land use, land-use change and forestry: comparison of dynamic life cycle assessment with ton-year approaches," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 759-776, December.
    16. Westholm, Lisa & Henders, Sabine & Ostwald, Madelene & Mattsson, Eskil, 2009. "Assessment of existing global financial initiatives and monitoring aspects of carbon sinks in forest ecosystems – The issue of REDD," Working Papers in Economics 373, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    17. Cunha, Felipe Arias Fogliano de Souza & Börner, Jan & Wunder, Sven & Cosenza, Carlos Alberto Nunes & Lucena, André F.P., 2016. "The implementation costs of forest conservation policies in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 209-220.
    18. Anderson, Blake & M'Gonigle, Michael, 2012. "Does ecological economics have a future?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 37-48.
    19. Rossi, Vivien & Claeys, Florian & Bastin, Didier & Gourlet-Fleury, Sylvie & Guizol, Philippe & Eba’a-Atyi, Richard & Sonwa, Denis J. & Lescuyer, Guillaume & Picard, Nicolas, 2017. "Could REDD+ mechanisms induce logging companies to reduce forest degradation in Central Africa?," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 107-117.
    20. Suzi Kerr, 2003. "Indigenous Forests and Forest Sink Policy in New Zealand," Working Papers 03_15, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.

    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:7:y:2015:i:4:p:3665-3682:d:47436. 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.