IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/uwp/landec/v79y2003i1p56-73.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biodiversity and Timber in the Coast Range of Oregon: Inside the Production Possibility Frontier

Author

Listed:
  • Mark E. Lichtenstein
  • Claire A. Montgomery

Abstract

This study attempts to bridge the gap between studies that model cost-effective land management for single species and studies that model large sets of species or biodiversity. We estimated a production possibility frontier for biodiversity and timber production using simulated annealing for a study area in the Coast Range of Oregon. The model produced spatially explicit land management regimes over a 100-year time horizon. Current landowner objectives were then simulated and compared to cost-effective management along the production possibility frontier. The results suggest substantial potential for improving efficiency of forest land management in the study area.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark E. Lichtenstein & Claire A. Montgomery, 2003. "Biodiversity and Timber in the Coast Range of Oregon: Inside the Production Possibility Frontier," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(1), pages 56-73.
    • Handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:79:y:2003:i:1:p:56-73
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://le.uwpress.org/cgi/reprint/79/1/56
    Download Restriction: A subscripton is required to access pdf files. Pay per article is available.
    ---><---

    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. Hyde, William F., 1989. "Marginal Costs of Managing Endangered Species:The Case of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker," Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 41(2), pages 1-8.
    2. Robert G. Haight & Charles S. Revelle & Stephanie A. Snyder, 2000. "An Integer Optimization Approach to a Probabilistic Reserve Site Selection Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 48(5), pages 697-708, October.
    3. Montgomery Claire A. & Brown Jr. , Gardner M. & Adams Darius M., 1994. "The Marginal Cost of Species Preservation: The Northern Spotted Owl," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 111-128, March.
    4. Stephen K. Swallow & Piyali Talukdar & David N. Wear, 1997. "Spatial and Temporal Specialization in Forest Ecosystem Management Under Sole Ownership," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(2), pages 311-326.
    5. Elizabeth Marshall & Frances Homans & Robert Haight, 2000. "Exploring Strategies for Improving the Cost Effectiveness of Endangered Species Management: The Kirtland's Warbler as a Case Study," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(3), pages 462-473.
    6. Jeffrey R. Vincent & Clark S. Binkley, 1993. "Efficient Multiple-Use Forestry May Require Land-Use Specialization," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 69(4), pages 370-376.
    7. Stephen Polasky & Jeffrey D. Camm & Brian Garber-Yonts, 2001. "Selecting Biological Reserves Cost-Effectively: An Application to Terrestrial Vertebrate Conservation in Oregon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(1), pages 68-78.
    8. Albers, Heidi J., 1996. "Modeling Ecological Constraints on Tropical Forest Management: Spatial Interdependence, Irreversibility, and Uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 73-94, January.
    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. Chand, Narendra & Kerr, Geoffrey N. & Bigsby, Hugh R., "undated". "Why some community forests are performing better than others: a case of forest user groups in Nepal," 2010 Conference, August 26-27, 2010, Nelson, New Zealand 96827, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Christian Langpap & Joe Kerkvliet & Jason F Shogren, 2018. "The Economics of the U.S. Endangered Species Act: A Review of Recent Developments," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 69-91.
    3. Hale, Todd & Kahui, Viktoria & Farhat, Daniel, 2015. "A modified production possibility frontier for efficient forestry management under the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 59(1), January.
    4. Nanang, David M. & Hauer, Grant K., 2008. "Integrating a random utility model for non-timber forest users into a strategic forest planning model," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 133-153, April.
    5. Yanis Elalamy & Luc Doyen & Lauriane Mouysset, 2019. "Contribution of the land use allocation model for agroecosystems: The case of Torrecchia Vecchia," Post-Print hal-03143304, HAL.
    6. Juutinen, Artti, 2008. "Old-growth boreal forests: Worth protecting for biodiversity?," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 242-267, November.
    7. Ekvall, Hans & Bostedt, Göran & Jonsson, Mattias, 2013. "Least-cost allocation of measures to increase the amount of coarse woody debris in forest estates," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 267-285.
    8. Wossink, Ada & Swinton, Scott M., 2007. "Jointness in production and farmers' willingness to supply non-marketed ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 297-304, December.
    9. Kline, Jeffrey D. & Mazzotta, Marisa J. & Spies, Thomas A. & Harmon, Mark E., 2013. "Applying the Ecosystem Services Concept to Public Land Management," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 42(1), pages 1-20, April.
    10. Polasky, Stephen & Costello, Christopher & McAusland, Carol, 2004. "On trade, land-use, and biodiversity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 911-925, September.
    11. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    12. Chand, Narendra & Kerr, Geoffrey N. & Bigsby, Hugh, 2015. "Production efficiency of community forest management in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 172-179.
    13. Bekele, Elias G. & Lant, Christopher L. & Soman, Sethuram & Misgna, Girmay, 2013. "The evolution and empirical estimation of ecological-economic production possibilities frontiers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 1-9.
    14. Hauer, Grant & Cumming, Steve & Schmiegelow, Fiona & Adamowicz, Wiktor & Weber, Marian & Jagodzinski, Robert, 2010. "Tradeoffs between forestry resource and conservation values under alternate policy regimes: A spatial analysis of the western Canadian boreal plains," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(21), pages 2590-2603.
    15. Groeneveld, Rolf, 2005. "Economic considerations in the optimal size and number of reserve sites," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 219-228, January.
    16. Bettinger, Pete & Boston, Kevin, 2008. "Habitat and commodity production trade-offs in coastal Oregon," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 112-128, June.
    17. Polasky, Stephen & Costello, Christopher & Solow, Andrew, 2005. "The Economics of Biodiversity," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 29, pages 1517-1560, Elsevier.
    18. Artti Juutinen & Mikko Mönkkönen, 2007. "Alternative targets and economic efficiency of selecting protected areas for biodiversity conservation in boreal forest," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(4), pages 713-732, August.

    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. Polasky, Stephen & Costello, Christopher & Solow, Andrew, 2005. "The Economics of Biodiversity," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 29, pages 1517-1560, Elsevier.
    2. Polasky, Stephen & Costello, Christopher & McAusland, Carol, 2004. "On trade, land-use, and biodiversity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 911-925, September.
    3. Swallow, Stephen K., 1996. "Economic Issues in Ecosystem Management: An Introduction and Overview," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 83-100, October.
    4. Jens Abildtrup & Jacques-Alexandre Laye & Maximilien Laye & Anne Stenger, 2012. "Irreversibility and Uncertainty in Multifunctional Forest Management Allocation," Post-Print hal-01072290, HAL.
    5. Nalle, Darek J. & Montgomery, Claire A. & Arthur, Jeffrey L. & Polasky, Stephen & Schumaker, Nathan H., 2004. "Modeling joint production of wildlife and timber," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 997-1017, November.
    6. Gregory S. Amacher & Erkki Koskela & Markku Ollikainen, 2002. "Forest Rotations and Stand Interdependency: Ownership Structure and Timing of Decisions," CESifo Working Paper Series 673, CESifo.
    7. Juutinen, Artti, 2008. "Old-growth boreal forests: Worth protecting for biodiversity?," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 242-267, November.
    8. Gregory, S. Amacher & Christine Conway, M. & Sullivan, Jay & Gregory, S. Amacher, 2003. "Econometric analyses of nonindustrial forest landowners: Is there anything left to study?," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 137-164.
    9. Rose, Steven K. & Chapman, Duane, 2003. "Timber harvest adjacency economies, hunting, species protection, and old growth value: seeking the dynamic optimum," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2-3), pages 325-344, March.
    10. Artti Juutinen & Mikko Mönkkönen, 2007. "Alternative targets and economic efficiency of selecting protected areas for biodiversity conservation in boreal forest," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(4), pages 713-732, August.
    11. Matthew Potts & Jeffrey Vincent, 2008. "Spatial distribution of species populations, relative economic values, and the optimal size and number of reserves," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(2), pages 91-112, February.
    12. Billionnet, Alain, 2011. "Solving the probabilistic reserve selection problem," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(3), pages 546-554.
    13. Stephanie A. Snyder & Robert G. Haight, 2016. "Application of the Maximal Covering Location Problem to Habitat Reserve Site Selection," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 39(1), pages 28-47, January.
    14. Ando, Amy W. & Getzner, Michael, 2006. "The roles of ownership, ecology, and economics in public wetland-conservation decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 287-303, June.
    15. Warziniack, Travis & Sims, Charles & Haas, Jessica, 2019. "Fire and the joint production of ecosystem services: A spatial-dynamic optimization approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Hayri Önal & Robert A. Briers, 2006. "Optimal Selection of a Connected Reserve Network," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 54(2), pages 379-388, April.
    17. Markku Ollikainen & Erkki Koskela, 2001. "Optimal Private and Public Harvesting under Spatial and Temporal Interdependence," CESifo Working Paper Series 452, CESifo.
    18. Harpankar, Kshama, 2006. "Reserve Selection in the presence of Economic Feedback Effects," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21177, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Bauer, Dana Marie & Swallow, Stephen K. & Paton, Peter W.C., 2010. "Cost-effective species conservation in exurban communities: A spatial analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 180-202, April.
    20. Jiang, Yong & Swallow, Stephen K., 2017. "Impact Fees Coupled With Conservation Payments to Sustain Ecosystem Structure: A Conceptual and Numerical Application at the Urban-Rural Fringe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 136-147.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry

    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:uwp:landec:v:79:y:2003:i:1:p:56-73. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://le.uwpress.org/ .

    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.