IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ulp/sbbeta/2020-27.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is diversification a good option to reduce drought-induced risk of forest decline? An economic approach focused on carbon accounting

Author

Listed:
  • Sandrine Brèteau-Amores
  • Mathieu Fortin
  • Pablo Andrés-Domenech
  • Nathalie Bréda

Abstract

Extreme or recurrent drought event is the principal source of stress impairing forest health and it causes financial losses for forest owners and amenity losses for society. The major part of the forested area in the Grand-Est region (France) is dominated by beech, which is projected to decline in the future due to repeated drought events driven by climate change. Beech forests need to adapt and diversification is a management option to reduce drought-induced risk of dieback. For this purpose, we studied two types of diversification that we analysed separately and jointly: mixture of beech species with oak species and mixture of different tree diameter classes (i.e. uneven-aged forest), which is rarely considered as an adaptation strategy. We also considered two types of loss (financial, and in terms of carbon sequestration) under different recurrences of drought events, that are a consequence of climate change. We combined a forest growth simulator (MATHILDE) with a traditional forest economic approach through land expectation value (LEV). The maximisation of the LEV criteria made it possible to identify the best adaptation strategies in economic terms. We also developed the carbon approach considering three accounting methods (i.e. market value, shadow price and social cost of carbon). The results shows that diversification reduces the loss of total volume of wood due to drought-induced risk and increases LEV, but reduces carbon storage. The trade-offs between the financial balance and the carbon balance, and the underlying question of the additivity (or not) of the two adaptation strategies are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandrine Brèteau-Amores & Mathieu Fortin & Pablo Andrés-Domenech & Nathalie Bréda, 2020. "Is diversification a good option to reduce drought-induced risk of forest decline? An economic approach focused on carbon accounting," Working Papers of BETA 2020-27, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
  • Handle: RePEc:ulp:sbbeta:2020-27
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://beta.u-strasbg.fr/WP/2020/2020-27.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Howard, Peter & Sterner, Thomas, 2014. "Raising the Temperature on Food Prices: Climate Change, Food Security, and the Social Cost of Carbon," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170648, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. 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)

    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. Robert N. Stavins, 1998. "A Methodological Investigation of the Costs of Carbon Sequestration," Journal of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 231-277, November.
    2. Caparros, Alejandro & Cerda, Emilio & Ovando, P. & Campos, Pablo, 2007. "Carbon Sequestration with Reforestations and Biodiversity-Scenic Values," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 9323, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    3. G. Cornelis van Kooten & Sabina Lee Shaikh & Pavel Suchánek, 2002. "Mitigating Climate Change by Planting Trees: The Transaction Costs Trap," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(4), pages 559-572.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. L. Gharis & J. Roise & J. McCarter, 2015. "A compromise programming model for developing the cost of including carbon pools and flux into forest management," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 232(1), pages 115-133, September.
    7. Gregmar Galinato & Shinsuke Uchida, 2010. "Evaluating Temporary Certified Emission Reductions in Reforestation and Afforestation Programs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(1), pages 111-133, May.
    8. David Walker, 2014. "The Economic Potential for Forest-Based Carbon Sequestration under Different Emissions Targets and Accounting Schemes," Working Papers 2014.02, School of Economics, La Trobe University.
    9. Kooten, G. Cornelis Van, 2022. "The Impact of Carbon on Optimal Forest Rotation Ages: An Application to Coastal Forests in British Columbia," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322612, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Nghiem, Nhung, 2016. "Optimal forest rotation for carbon sequestration and biodiversity conservation by farm income levels," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 185-194.
    11. Szajkó, Gabriella & Rácz, Viktor József & Kis, András, 2024. "The role of price incentives in enhancing carbon sequestration in the forestry sector of Hungary," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    12. 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.
    13. Ariste, Ruolz & Lasserre, Pierre, 2001. "La gestion optimale d’une forêt exploitée pour son potentiel de diminution des gaz à effet de serre et son bois," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 77(1), pages 27-51, mars.
    14. Grilli, Gianluca & Fratini, Roberto & Marone, Enrico & Sacchelli, Sandro, 2020. "A spatial-based tool for the analysis of payments for forest ecosystem services related to hydrogeological protection," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    15. Centeno, Maria Luz N., 2000. "Deforestation In The Philippines: A Cge Modelling Approach," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 123619, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    16. Tee, James & Scarpa, Riccardo & Marsh, Dan & Guthrie, Graeme, 2012. "Valuation of Carbon Forestry and the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme: A Real Options Approach Using the Binomial Tree Method," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 123665, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Dwivedi, Puneet & Bailis, Robert & Stainback, Andrew & Carter, Douglas R., 2012. "Impact of payments for carbon sequestered in wood products and avoided carbon emissions on the profitability of NIPF landowners in the US South," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 63-69.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Newman, D.H., 2002. "Forestry's golden rule and the development of the optimal forest rotation literature," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 5-27.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Drought; Adaptation; Climate change; Mixed forest; Economics; Carbon.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    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:ulp:sbbeta:2020-27. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bestrfr.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.