IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-99-27.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Potential for Carbon Forest Plantation in Marginal Timber Forests: The Case of Patagonia, Argentina

Author

Listed:
  • Sedjo, Roger

    (Resources for the Future)

Abstract

With the advent of the Kyoto Protocol and its recognition of the use of forestry activities and carbon sinks as acceptable tools for addressing the issue of the build-up of atmospheric carbon, the potential role of planted forests as a vehicle for carbon sequestration has taken on a new significance. Additionally, the emergence of tradable emission permits and now tradable carbon offsets provides a vehicle for financially capturing the benefits of carbon emission reductions and carbon offsetting activities. In a world where carbon sequestration has monetary value, investments in planted forests can be made with an eye to revenues to (at least two) joint outputs: timber and the carbon sequestration services. The first section of this paper examines the Patagonia region of Argentina, as an example of an area where carbon sequestration values combined with timber values create financial incentives for creating planted forests, which could not be justified on the bases of timber values alone. The paper uses a present value approach to evaluate the costs and benefits of plantation forestry in a "representative" site in Patagonia. A basic timber harvest scenario is developed and then a number of alternative scenarios are examined. These introduce carbon as an additional product to be produced "jointly" with timber. The scenarios include alternative rotation periods, alternative prices for carbon offsets, and a brief examination of the effect of undertaking a specific silvicultural activity. In the second section of the paper the results of this analysis are considered in the context of a discussion of the various types of institutional arrangements that might be required to provide a market for the carbon sequestration services provided by the planted forests. The paper identifies, examines and discusses a number of potential institutional arrangements that exist or are under discussion for marketing carbon sequestration services. A number of problems that may arise with offset credits and some of the innovative institutions that may be created are identified and discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Sedjo, Roger, 1999. "Potential for Carbon Forest Plantation in Marginal Timber Forests: The Case of Patagonia, Argentina," RFF Working Paper Series dp-99-27, Resources for the Future.
  • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-99-27
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-99-27.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roger Sedjo & Joe Wisniewski & Alaric Sample & John Kinsman, 1995. "The economics of managing carbon via forestry: Assessment of existing studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(2), pages 139-165, September.
    2. 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.
    3. G. Cornelis van Kooten & Clark S. Binkley & Gregg Delcourt, 1995. "Effect of Carbon Taxes and Subsidies on Optimal Forest Rotation Age and Supply of Carbon Services," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(2), pages 365-374.
    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. Benitez, Pablo C. & McCallum, Ian & Obersteiner, Michael & Yamagata, Yoshiki, 2007. "Global potential for carbon sequestration: Geographical distribution, country risk and policy implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 572-583, January.
    2. Sedjo, Roger, 2001. "Forest Carbon Sequestration: Some Issues for Forest Investments," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-34, Resources for the Future.
    3. Caplan, Arthur J., 2011. "Carbon sequestration and permit trading on the competitive fringe," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 2803-2810.
    4. Olschewski, Roland & Benítez, Pablo C. & de Koning, G.H.J. & Schlichter, Tomás, 2005. "How attractive are forest carbon sinks? Economic insights into supply and demand of Certified Emission Reductions," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 77-94, September.
    5. Sedjo, Roger A., 2001. "Forest Carbon Sequestration: Some Issues for Forest Investments," Discussion Papers 10571, Resources for the Future.
    6. Acosta, Montserrat & Sohngen, Brent, 2009. "How big is leakage from forestry carbon credits? Estimates from a Global Model," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49468, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Olschewski, Roland & Benitez, Pablo C., 2005. "Secondary forests as temporary carbon sinks? The economic impact of accounting methods on reforestation projects in the tropics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 380-394, November.
    8. Jung, Martina, 2003. "The Role of Forestry Sinks in the CDM - Analysing the Effects of Policy Decisions on the Carbon Market," Discussion Paper Series 26293, Hamburg Institute of International Economics.

    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. Lintunen, Jussi & Uusivuori, Jussi, 2014. "On The Economics of Forest Carbon: Renewable and Carbon Neutral But Not Emission Free," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 165755, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    2. Hennessy, David A. & Saak, Alexander E., 2003. "State-Contingent Demand for Herbicide-Tolerance Seed Trait," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 28(1), pages 1-14, April.
    3. Gren, Ing-Marie & Zeleke, Abenezer Aklilu, 2016. "Policy design for forest carbon sequestration: A review of the literature," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 128-136.
    4. Sedjo, Roger A., 1999. "Potential for Carbon Forest Plantations in Marginal Timber Forests: The Case of Patagonia, Argentina," Discussion Papers 10661, Resources for the Future.
    5. Sedjo, Roger A., 2001. "Forest Carbon Sequestration: Some Issues for Forest Investments," Discussion Papers 10571, Resources for the Future.
    6. Lintunen, Jussi & Uusivuori, Jussi, 2016. "On the economics of forests and climate change: Deriving optimal policies," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 130-156.
    7. Rong Li & Brent Sohngen & Xiaohui Tian, 2022. "Efficiency of forest carbon policies at intensive and extensive margins," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(4), pages 1243-1267, August.
    8. Couture, Stéphane & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Forest management under fire risk when forest carbon sequestration has value," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2002-2011, September.
    9. Shaikh, Sabina L. & Sun, Lili & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2005. "Are Agricultural Values a Reliable Guide in Determining Landowners’ Decisions to Create Carbon Forest Sinks?," Working Papers 37017, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    10. 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.
    11. 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).
    12. Ovando, Paola & Caparrós, Alejandro, 2009. "Land use and carbon mitigation in Europe: A survey of the potentials of different alternatives," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 992-1003, March.
    13. Miettinen, Jenni & Ollikainen, Markku & Nieminen, Tiina M. & Ukonmaanaho, Liisa & Laurén, Ari & Hynynen, Jari & Lehtonen, Mika & Valsta, Lauri, 2014. "Whole-tree harvesting with stump removal versus stem-only harvesting in peatlands when water quality, biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation matter," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 25-35.
    14. Tavoni, Massimo & Sohngen, Brent & Bosetti, Valentina, 2007. "Forestry and the carbon market response to stabilize climate," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5346-5353, November.
    15. G. Cornelis Kooten, 2000. "Economic Dynamics of Tree Planting for Carbon Uptake on Marginal Agricultural Lands," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 48(1), pages 51-65, March.
    16. Creedy, John & Wurzbacher, Anke D., 2001. "The economic value of a forested catchment with timber, water and carbon sequestration benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 71-83, July.
    17. Adam J. Daigneault & Mario J. Miranda & Brent Sohngen, 2010. "Optimal Forest Management with Carbon Sequestration Credits and Endogenous Fire Risk," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(1), pages 155-172.
    18. van 't Veld, Klaas & Plantinga, Andrew, 2005. "Carbon sequestration or abatement? The effect of rising carbon prices on the optimal portfolio of greenhouse-gas mitigation strategies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 59-81, July.
    19. Benitez, Pablo C. & Obersteiner, Michael, 2006. "Site identification for carbon sequestration in Latin America: A grid-based economic approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(6), pages 636-651, August.
    20. Choi, Suk-Won & Sohngen, Brent & Alig, Ralph J., 2001. "Land-Use Change And Carbon Sequestration In The Forests Of Ohio, Indiana, And Illinois: Sensitivity To Population And Model Choice," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20564, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rff:dpaper:dp-99-27. 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: Resources for the Future (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffffus.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.