IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eerjnl/v9y2022i2p48.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Model of Community Forest Land Management Production and Financial Simulation of Super Teak, Solomon Teak and Sungkai Trees in Samboja Kutai Kartanegara East Kalimantan, Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Budi Setiawan
  • Abubakar M. Lahjie
  • Syahrir Yusuf
  • Yosep Ruslim

Abstract

The objective of the research were to determine the volume increments, to find out the optimum ages and maximum increment, to know which plant effort was more profitable than each types exploitations, to analyze the financial feasibility and to know the farmers' financial needs and the level of interest by sensitivity analysis. This research was conducted in community forest of Sungai Merdeka Village Km. 38 Samboja District, Kutai Kartanegara Sub District of East Kalimantan Province. The research data was taken based on a purpose sampling system in the research plots of each Model I to V covering an area of 0.25 ha. Model I consisted by super teak 15 years 10x2 m spacing combined with king grass with an interest rate of 5% resulted in an estimated 6.5-year Pay Back Period (PP); Net Present Value (NPV) Rp. 186,346,058, -; Net Benefit/Cost (B/C) Ratio 3.99; Internal Rate of Return (IRR) 28%; Equivalent Annual Annuity (EAA) Rp. 12,122,078 and effort scale of 3 ha. Model II consisted by super teak 15 years 10x10 m spacing with an interest rate of 5% produce an estimated 18.5-year PP; Rp. (15,890,541,-) NPV; Net (B/C) Ratio to 0.72; (IRR) to 3%; (EAA) to Rp. (1,033,703,-) and (41) ha effort scale. Model III consisted by Solomon Teak 13 years 10x10 m spacing with an interest rate of 5% produce an estimated 10.4 year (PP); (NPV) to Rp. 97,546,242, -; Net (B/C) Ratio to 2.38; (IRR) to 10%; (EAA) to Rp. 6,345,523,- and 7 ha effort scale. Model IV consisted by sungkai 13 years 2x4 m spacing combined with papaya by an interest rate of 5% produce an estimated 13.1 years (PP) value; (NPV) to Rp. 41,099,472, -; Net (B/C) Ratio to 1.83; (IRR) to 22.5%; (EAA) to Rp. 2,673,580, - and 16 ha effort scale. Model V consisted by Sungkai 13 years with an interest rate of 5% produced an estimated 18.1 year (PP); (NPV) to Rp. -13.141,863, -; Net (B/C) Ratio 0.73; (IRR) to 3.2%; (EAA) to Rp. -854,897, - and (49) ha effort scale. Its concluded that by 5% discount factor, Model I, Model III and Model IV were feasible because they have an IRR value higher than Minimum Acceptable Rate (MAR) 5% and Net B/C Ratio higher than 1. Model II and Model V were not feasible because they have an IRR value lower than MAR 5% and Net B/C Ratio lower than 1. The optimum production of all models was reached at the ages of 25 years. The highest MAI was achieved in Model IV of 7.34 m3 ha-1 year-1 and the total volume was 183.56 m3 ha-1 year-1, while the lowest MAI was achieved in Model II of 6.25 m3 ha-1 year-1 and the total volume was 33.10 m3 ha-1 year-1. Based on the analysis of effort scale resulted that Model I could be the best choice and most feasible than other because it had the lowest effort scale value, while Model V was the least feasible option to be cultivated because it has the highest scale of effort. Model I, Model III and IV shown the NPV positive value to Rp. 186,346,058, -; Rp.97,546,242, - and Rp.41,099,472, -, while Model II and Model IV shown the negative value of Rp.(15,590,541,-) and Rp.(13,141,863,-).

Suggested Citation

  • Budi Setiawan & Abubakar M. Lahjie & Syahrir Yusuf & Yosep Ruslim, 2022. "Model of Community Forest Land Management Production and Financial Simulation of Super Teak, Solomon Teak and Sungkai Trees in Samboja Kutai Kartanegara East Kalimantan, Indonesia," Energy and Environment Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(2), pages 1-48, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eerjnl:v:9:y:2022:i:2:p:48
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/eer/article/download/0/0/40643/41905
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/eer/article/view/0/40643
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vanzetti, Nicolás & Broz, Diego & Corsano, Gabriela & Montagna, Jorge M., 2018. "An optimization approach for multiperiod production planning in a sawmill," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 1-8.
    2. Reed, James & van Vianen, Josh & Foli, Samson & Clendenning, Jessica & Yang, Kevin & MacDonald, Margaret & Petrokofsky, Gillian & Padoch, Christine & Sunderland, Terry, 2017. "Trees for life: The ecosystem service contribution of trees to food production and livelihoods in the tropics," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 62-71.
    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. Jung, Suhyun & Hajjar, Reem, 2023. "The livelihood impacts of transnational aid for climate change mitigation: Evidence from Ghana," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    2. Ahammad, Ronju & Stacey, Natasha & Sunderland, Terry C.H., 2019. "Use and perceived importance of forest ecosystem services in rural livelihoods of Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 87-98.
    3. Shuo Wei & Su-Ting Cheng, 2022. "Estimating Pruning-Caused Loss on Ecosystem Services of Air Pollution Removal and Runoff Avoidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-12, May.
    4. Milbank, Charlotte, 2023. "Associating dietary quality and forest cover in India," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    5. Esther Reith & Elizabeth Gosling & Thomas Knoke & Carola Paul, 2020. "How Much Agroforestry Is Needed to Achieve Multifunctional Landscapes at the Forest Frontier?—Coupling Expert Opinion with Robust Goal Programming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-27, July.
    6. Nugun P. Jellason & Elizabeth J. Z. Robinson & Abbie S. A. Chapman & Dora Neina & Adam J. M. Devenish & June Y. T. Po & Barbara Adolph, 2021. "A Systematic Review of Drivers and Constraints on Agricultural Expansion in Sub-Saharan Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.
    7. Miyuki Iiyama & Athanase Mukuralinda & Jean Damascene Ndayambaje & Bernard Musana & Alain Ndoli & Jeremias G. Mowo & Dennis Garrity & Stephen Ling & Vicky Ruganzu, 2018. "Tree-Based Ecosystem Approaches (TBEAs) as Multi-Functional Land Management Strategies—Evidence from Rwanda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-24, April.
    8. Héritier Khoji Muteya & Dieu-donné N’Tambwe Nghonda & Franco Mwamba Kalenda & Harold Strammer & François Munyemba Kankumbi & François Malaisse & Jean-François Bastin & Yannick Useni Sikuzani & Jan Bog, 2023. "Mapping and Quantification of Miombo Deforestation in the Lubumbashi Charcoal Production Basin (DR Congo): Spatial Extent and Changes between 1990 and 2022," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, September.
    9. C. Hall & J. I. Macdiarmid & R. B. Matthews & P. Smith & S. F. Hubbard & T. P. Dawson, 2019. "The relationship between forest cover and diet quality: a case study of rural southern Malawi," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 11(3), pages 635-650, June.
    10. Sarah E. Castle & Daniel C. Miller & Pablo J. Ordonez & Kathy Baylis & Karl Hughes, 2021. "The impacts of agroforestry interventions on agricultural productivity, ecosystem services, and human well‐being in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), June.
    11. Hua Zhou & Jiachen Fan & Xue Yang & Kaifeng Duan, 2023. "Food Export Stability, Political Ties, and Land Resources," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-20, September.
    12. S. B. Chavan & Ram Newaj & R. H. Rizvi & Ajit & Rajendra Prasad & Badre Alam & A. K. Handa & S. K. Dhyani & Amit Jain & Dharmendra Tripathi, 2021. "Reduction of global warming potential vis-à-vis greenhouse gases through traditional agroforestry systems in Rajasthan, India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 4573-4593, March.
    13. Claudia de Brito Quadros Gonçalves & Madalena Maria Schlindwein & Gabrielli do Carmo Martinelli, 2021. "Agroforestry Systems: A Systematic Review Focusing on Traditional Indigenous Practices, Food and Nutrition Security, Economic Viability, and the Role of Women," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-20, October.
    14. Yevheniia Varyvoda & Douglas Taren, 2022. "Considering Ecosystem Services in Food System Resilience," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-16, March.
    15. Gebeyanesh Zerssa & Debela Feyssa & Dong-Gill Kim & Bettina Eichler-Löbermann, 2021. "Challenges of Smallholder Farming in Ethiopia and Opportunities by Adopting Climate-Smart Agriculture," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-26, February.
    16. Takahashi, Ryo & Otsuka, Keijiro & Tilahun, Mesfin & Birhane, Emiru & Holden, Stein, 2024. "Beyond Ostrom: Randomized experiment of the impact of individualized tree rights on forest management in Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    17. Broz, Diego & Vanzetti, Nicolás & Corsano, Gabriela & Montagna, Jorge M., 2019. "Goal programming application for the decision support in the daily production planning of sawmills," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 29-40.
    18. Adam, Ismail Abdalla Abuelbashar & Adam, Yahia Omar & Olumeh, Dennis Etemesi & Mithöfer, Dagmar, 2024. "Livelihood strategies, baobab income and income inequality: Evidence from Kordofan and Blue Nile, Sudan," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    19. Razafindratsima, Onja H. & Kamoto, Judith F.M. & Sills, Erin O. & Mutta, Doris N. & Song, Conghe & Kabwe, Gillian & Castle, Sarah E. & Kristjanson, Patricia M. & Ryan, Casey M. & Brockhaus, Maria & Su, 2021. "Reviewing the evidence on the roles of forests and tree-based systems in poverty dynamics," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    20. Ida Nadia S. Djenontin & Samson Foli & Leo C. Zulu, 2018. "Revisiting the Factors Shaping Outcomes for Forest and Landscape Restoration in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Way Forward for Policy, Practice and Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-34, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ibn:eerjnl:v:9:y:2022:i:2:p:48. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.