Rewarding carbon sequestration in South-Western French forests: A costly operation?

The extension of rotation lengths in forests has been proposed as an option for increasing carbon storage and contributing to climate change mitigation. This paper presents the results of a case study conducted on forests located in the southwest of France. The aim of this research was to assess the cost effectiveness of a subsidy/tax system on carbon fluxes. First, it is shown that such a mechanism leads forest owners to extend rotation lengths. However, cost effectiveness analysis shows that: (1) marginal social costs are more expensive than the private marginal costs of carbon sequestration; (2) marginal costs are higher when carbon stocks are discounted, ranging from 170.1 €/tC to 719.8 €/tC with discounted carbon stocks; and from 38.8 €/tC to 78.4 €/tC with undiscounted carbon stocks; (3) marginal costs are in the range of measures of the social value of carbon for France; (4) marginal costs increase with timber prices and increase with discount rate.     

Optimal rotation with declining discount rate

In recent years it has been argued, from many perspectives, that the further into the future a value flow occurs, the lower is the appropriate discount rate for it. National governments are now beginning to authorise such declining discount rates. This viewpoint can be, and has been, formalised in various ways, and has been applied to evaluating forestry investments of given durations. When the optimal duration of investment is itself the issue, new problems arise. Lower discount rates make subsequent rotations longer than earlier ones, and for a given length more valuable than they would otherwise be. This affects the optimal length of earlier rotations, which in turn may affect the discount rate profile applicable to later ones. In the absence of analytical solutions for the optimal sequence of rotations, numerical protocols are needed. The results arising are mostly in accord with expectations. If the change of discount rate is due to expected changes of circumstance that are actually realised, then the optimal sequence of rotations will remain as initially determined. If, however, it is due merely to the particular time perspective of the present generation, rotations will be revised by future generations. This will lead to a sequence of rotations similar to that deemed optimal at the current short-term discount rate. The most important reductions in profitability caused by choosing the “wrong” discounting protocol arise from the “wrong” rate, rather than by using declining rates as such.     

Long‐term versus temporary certified emission reductions in forest carbon sequestration programs*

Under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) of the Kyoto Protocol, forest projects can receive returns for carbon sequestration via two crediting instruments: temporary or long‐term certified emission reductions (tCERs or lCERs). This study shows the effect of lCERs on the private owner’s forest rotation intervals decision and carbon credit generation in afforestation and reforestation projects. A credit verification mechanism with a harvest penalty implemented under the lCERs policy distorts the timber harvesting decision and the corresponding carbon credit supply. Two opposing incentives are created by the lCERs mechanism which leads to either longer or shorter rotations compared to the Faustmann rotation, depending on which incentive prevails. Our numerical results show that both lCERs and tCERs seem to have similar impacts on harvesting incentives, but the resulting carbon supply differs among the instruments owing to the credit verification mechanism. The tCERs carbon supply curve is monotonically increasing in the carbon price, while a lCERs carbon supply is non‐monotonic and may have a backward bending region over a range of carbon prices.     

Determining optimal forest rotation ages and carbon offset credits: Accounting for post-harvest carbon storehouses

Sequestering carbon in forest ecosystems is important for mitigating climate change. A major policy concern is whether forests should be left unharvested to avoid carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions and store carbon, or harvested to take advantage of potential carbon storage in post-harvest wood product sinks and removal of CO₂ from the atmosphere by new growth. The issue is addressed in this paper by examining carbon rotation ages that consider commercial timber as well as carbon values. A discrete-time optimal rotation age model is developed that employs data on carbon fluxes stored in both living and dead biomass as opposed to carbon as a function of timber growth. Carbon is allocated to several ecosystem and post-harvest product pools that decay over time at different rates. In addition, the timing of carbon fluxes is taken into account by weighting future carbon fluxes as less important than current ones. Using simple formulae for determining optimal rotation ages, we find that: (1) Reducing the price of timber while increasing the price of carbon will increase rotation age, perhaps to infinity (stand remains unharvested). (2) An increase in the rate used to discount physical carbon generally reduces the rotation age, but not in all cases. (3) As a corollary, an increase in the price of carbon increases or reduces rotation age depending on the weight chosen to discount future carbon fluxes. (4) Site characteristics and the mix of species on the site affect conclusions (2) and (3). (5) A large variety of carbon offset credits from forestry activities could be justified, which makes it difficult to accept any.     

Optimizing joint production of timber and carbon sequestration of afforestation projects

Optimizing harvesting decisions has been a matter of concern in the forestry literature for centuries. However, in some tropical countries, growth models for fast-growing tree species have been developed only recently. Additionally, environmental services of forests gain importance and should be integrated in forest management decisions. We determine the impact of a joint production of timber and carbon sequestration on the optimal rotation of a fast-growing species in north-western Ecuador, comparing different optimization approaches and taking the latest developments of the Kyoto Protocol into account. We find that payments for carbon sequestration have substantial impact on the rotation length: in contrast to an optimum of 15 years when focusing on timber production only, joint production leads to a doubling of the rotation length, which means that timber harvest should be postponed until the end of the carbon project.     

Economics of carbon sequestration under fluctuating economic environment,forest management and technological changes: An application to forest stands in the southern United States

This study presents a model that determines the effect of current and future payments for carbon sequestration, proportion of wood that sequesters carbon in long-lived product and landfills, and amount of carbon in the wood, on the optimal current forest harvest age. Increased current and future prices of carbon would lead to a longer and shorter harvest age, respectively. Higher current prices of carbon could increase the supply of carbon at a decreasing rate due to longer harvest ages. Moderate prices of carbon would encourage landowners to maintain standing timber. Policies focused then on stimulating landowners to hold timber on forestlands may not necessarily imply higher amounts of sequestered carbon. Increased future values of carbon could imply a reduction of the current supply of carbon.     

Optimal forest harvest age considering carbon sequestration in multiple carbon pools: A comparative statics analysis

We present an analytical model for determination of the economically optimal harvest age of a forest stand considering timber value, and the value of carbon fluxes in living biomass, dead organic matter, and wood products pools. Through comparative statics analysis, we find that consideration of timber value and fluxes in biomass carbon increase harvest age relative to the timber only solution, and that the effect on optimal harvest age of incorporating fluxes in the dead organic matter and wood products pools is indeterminate.We also present a numerical example to examine the magnitudes of these effects. In general, incorporating the dead organic matter and wood products pools have the effect of reducing rotation age. Perhaps more interestingly, when initial stocks of carbon in dead organic matter or wood products pool are relatively high, consideration of these pools can have a highly negative effect on net present value.     

Forest land value and rotation with an alternative land use

We solve Faustmann's problem when the land manager plans to switch from the current tree species to some alternative species or land use. Such situations occur when the value of the alternative increases relative to the value of the species currently in place. The paper characterizes the land value function and the optimum rotations, highlighting the differences between this non-autonomous problem and the traditional Faustmann problem. We show that, from one harvest to the next until the switch, rotations can be constant and equal to the Faustmann rotation, or increasingly higher than the Faustmann rotation, or decreasingly lower. In the last two situations, the higher the number of previous harvests of the currently planted species before the switch to the alternative use, the closer the last rotation is to the Faustmann rotation.     

Review - Roger A. Sedjo (2003): Economics of Forestry

Ashgate Publishing Limited, Gower House, Croft Road, Aldershot, Hants GU11 3HR, England (www.ashgate.com). 498 p. £ 100.00. ISBN 0-7546-2237-1 (hardback).Being one volume in the series of the International Library of Environmental Economics and Policy (T. Tietenberg and W. Morrison, gen. eds.), this book is a collection of some of the most significant journal essays in forest economics and forest policy. In compiling this volume, Roger Sedjo did a great service to the forest economics profession.This volume includes twenty-five essays originally published between 1849 and 1996 in a dozen journals, and one chapter from the Third Assessment Report of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2001) which addresses the biological sequestration of carbon in terrestrial ecosystems. These are organized into four parts: the harvest rotation issue, timber supply, multiple-use and non-timber outputs, and global issues. An introduction essay to this volume, written by the editor, provides an overview of the major issues in forest resource management and discusses some the most important contributions to the forest economics literature.The eleven essays in the first part of the book provide a rather complete coverage of the most important contributions to the literature on optimal rotation age, which is a fundamental issue in forest management and forestry investment. Four of the essays (Faustmann 1849, Ohlin 1921, Bentley and Teeguarden 1965, and Samuelson 1976) address the basic formulation and interpretation of the optimal rotation model. Four essays (Löfgren 1985, Newman, Gilbert and Hyde 1985, Reed 1984, and Brazee and Mendelsohn 1988) extend the basic rotation model to examine the rotation age decision in the presence of deterministic trends and uncertainty in timber yield and price, respectively. Based on the Faustamnn rotation model, Klemperer (1976) and Chang (1982) examine the impacts of taxation on forest value and on the optimal rotation age. Koskela (1989) provides a detailed analysis of the impacts of taxation on timber harvest decisions under price uncertainty. What I feel missing in this part is a comparative statics analysis examining the impacts of changing economic parameters on the optimal rotation age.Part II includes five essays on economic analysis of long-run timber supply. Clawson (1979) reviews the historical development of forest resource and forest utilization in the United States. Vaux (1973) examines the long-run potential supply of timber from forest plantations in California. Berck (1979) investigates the difference in harvesting behavior between private forest owners and public managers. Lyon (1981) and Lyon and Sedjo (1983) examine the optimal exploitation of old-growth natural forests and the transition to steady state. While these essays all focus on the long-run timber supply in the United States, the methods developed and used in these papers could be applied for any other region. The exploitation of old-growth natural forests and the long-term availability of timber have been without doubt two major concerns in the United States. In many parts of the world, however, concerns about timber supply in the short-run have also had great influences on the development of forest policy. It would have been appreciated if a couple of essays addressing the short-run supply of timber had been included.Part III contains three essays dealing with the problem of multiple-use forest management. Gregory (1955) develops an economic framework for multiple-use management based joint production theory. Hartman (1976) examines the multiple-use rotation age decision. Swallow, Parks and Wear (1990) investigate the problem of non-convexities involved in multiple-use rotation age decisions. The merits of these essays lie in that they use rather simple models to demonstrate the importance of incorporating non-timber benefits in forestry decisions and the complexities of the multiple-use problem. In his 1976 essay, Hartman points out that in many situations management practices applied to one stand affect the value of non-timber outputs derived from the adjacent stands; such interdependence needs to be incorporated into multiple-use decision analysis. I certainly would like to find in this volume one or two essays examining the impacts of stand interdependence on the optimal decision. Another important issue in multiple-use management, which is not covered in this volume either, is the valuation of non-market priced outputs and services. Yet I believe that this omission is well motivated, for there are two separate volumes in this series devoted to non-market valuation methods (R. T. Carson, ed. Direct Environmental Valuation Methods, Volumes I and II).The seven essays in Part IV deal with a set of forest economic and policy issues related to global warming and biodiversity conservation. Parks and Hardie (1995) examine the cost-effective subsidies to convert marginal agricultural land to forests for the purpose of carbon sequestration. Hoen and Solberg (1993) analyze the potential and cost-effectiveness of increasing carbon sequestration in existing forests by changing forestry practices. van Kooten, Binkley and Delcourt (1995) examine the effect of carbon taxes and subsidies on the optimal rotation age. The chapter from the Third Assessment Report of IPCC (2001) provides a comprehensive review of the literature on the ecological, environmental, social and economic aspects of carbon sequestration in terrestrial ecosystems. While forests and forest management could play an important role in mitigating climate change, increasing level of atmospheric dioxide and climate change would inevitably affect the productivity of forest ecosystems, thereby could have significant impacts on future timber growth, harvest and inventory as well as carbon storage in forest ecosystems. Joyce et al. (1995) present a framework for analyzing the potential effects of climate change on the forest sector. The remaining two essays in this part examine the costs and benefits of biodiversity preservation, respectively. Montgomery, Brown and Adams (1994) estimate the marginal cost of preserving the northern spotted owl. Simpson, Sedjo and Reid (1996) examine the expected value of the marginal species as an input to pharmaceuticals.The editor points out in the introduction chapter that there are many other important contributions that are not included in this volume, some of these are mentioned, others not. In addition to the few omissions noted earlier, several important economic and policy issues such as uneven-aged stand management, deforestation, international trade, sustainable forestry, forest recreation, wildlife management and so on are not discussed. Moreover, none of the journal essays published since 1997 is selected. That there are many other important contributions does not mean the essays included in this volume are less important, however. While each forest economist may present a different list of the most important papers, most (if not all) of the essays in this volume would appear on anyone's list. I strongly recommend this book for research scientists and graduate students of forest economics as an essential addition to their reference library.     

Pressler's indicator rate formula as a guide for forest management

In this paper, it is shown that Pressler's indicator rate formula is also the optimal condition for the determination of the optimal harvest age under the generalized Faustmann formula. In addition, a modern treatment of the quantity increment, quality increment, and price increment is presented. Pressler's indicator rate formula is then applied to determine the optimal harvest age in a dynamic world of unanticipated changes.     

The effect of site quality on economically optimal stand management

This paper proposes a discrete-time type timber harvesting model for simultaneously determining (i) the optimal quantity of seedlings to be planted, (ii) the optimal quantities of timber harvested by thinnings, and (iii) the optimal rotation age. With the help of Microsoft Excel Solver, a generalized reduced gradient algorithm, numerical examples are developed to evaluate the impact of the variations in the quality level of a forest site on the optimal harvest strategy. It is shown that the level of optimal rotation age and optimal quantity of seedlings to be planted can individually exhibit non-monotonicity to the increase in site quality.     

Effects of resin tapping on optimal rotation age of pine plantation

This paper analyses the effects of resin benefit on the optimal rotation age of Simao pine plantation. Timber growth and resin yield functions were first derived, and then an integrated formulation for Hartman rotation was solved by taking both timber and resin benefits into consideration through numerical optimization. Empirical results indicate that: (1) the inclusion of resin benefit results in lengthening optimal rotation age; (2) resin benefit has a greater effect on rotation age when discount rate is low than when it is high, ceteris paribus; (3) with an improvement of site productivity, resin benefit has a decreasing effect on rotation age, other factors being constant. These effects are also true with respect to benefit gains in present value.     

Designing afforestation subsidies that account for the benefits of carbon sequestration: A case study using data from China's Loess Plateau

This paper presents a method for determining the subsidy required to motivate farmers to participate in timber afforestation programs designed to maximize social well-being. The method incorporates a carbon sequestration benefit function into the land expected value model in order to quantify the social benefit arising from carbon sequestration by the planted trees. This is used to calculate the optimal rotation age for newly planted forests that maximizes social utility. The minimum subsidy required to motivate farmers to participate in the afforestation program was calculated using a modified decision model that accounts for the subsidy's impact. The maximum subsidy offered by the government was taken to be the NPV of the carbon sequestration achieved by afforestation. Data on Robinia pseudoacacia L. trees planted on the Loess Plateau were used in an empirical test of the model, which in this case predicts an optimal subsidy of 254.38 yuan/ha over 40 years. This would guarantee the maintenance of forest on land designated for afforestation until they reached the socially optimal rotation age. The method presented herein offers a new framework for designing afforestation subsidy programs that account for the environmental service (specially, the carbon sequestration) provided by forests.     

The Optimal Length of an Agricultural Carbon Contract

In this paper, we present the economic determinants of the optimal length of a carbon offset contract. We find that because of a declining capacity of the soil to sequester carbon, the optimal length of the carbon contract is finite (the marginal benefit of remaining in the contract is declining over time, whereas marginal opportunity cost is rising). We also explore the effect of varying key parameter values on the optimal length in the contract. If the contract requires the farmer to sequester at a higher rate, the farmer chooses the contract for a shorter length of time, and this may decrease rather than increase social welfare. If society places a higher value on carbon accumulation, the contract is chosen for a longer length of time. Finally, if both the farmer and society have a higher discount rate, the model provides a somewhat surprising result. The overall time in the contract, and benefits from carbon accumulation are higher when the common discount rate is higher.     

Optimal harvest age considering multiple carbon pools – A comment

In two recent papers, Asante and Armstrong (2012) and Asante et al. (2011) considered the question of optimal harvest ages. They found that the larger are the initial pools of dead organic matter (DOM) and wood products, the shorter is the optimal rotation period. In this note, it is found that this conclusion follows from the fact that the authors ignored all release of carbon from decomposition of DOM and wood products after the time of the first harvest. When this is corrected for, the sizes of the initial stocks of DOM and wood products do not influence the optimal rotation period. Moreover, in contrast to the conclusions in the two mentioned papers, our numerical analysis indicates that inclusion of DOM in the model leads to longer, not shorter, rotation periods.     

Editorial - Multiple-use forestry

The problem of multiple-use forestry arises because (1) a forest can be managed to provide a wide range of products and services, (2) the different uses are not perfectly compatible with each other, and (3) some products are not priced in markets and many of the services a forest provides have the characteristics of public goods. Examples of major forest products include, in addition to timber, edible berries, fungi, and hunting games. Forests also provide recreation opportunities and various environmental services (such as regulating local climate, reducing soil erosion, reducing pollutants in the atmosphere, regulating the global climate, providing habitats for wildlife, etc.). The outputs of nontimber goods in general depend on the quantity and structure of the forest, which can be changed by various forest management activities. However, a forest state most suitable for the production of one good is usually not optimal with respect to another good. Typically, there does not exist a set of management activities that simultaneously maximize the outputs of timber and all other goods.Another way to understand the conflicts between different uses is to view standing timber as an intermediate product of forestry investment, which is employed as an “input” for the production of timber products and nontimber goods. Thinking in this way, the conflicts arise partly because timber production and nontimber uses compete for the same input, and partly because of the differences in the “production technology” among different nontimber goods. A change in the standing timber may have positive impacts on some nontimber uses, but have negative effects on others. Because of the conflicts among different uses, it requires that both timber products and nontimber goods should be explicitly incorporated into forestry decision-making in order to achieve the greatest benefits to the forest owner and/or the public.Most of the economic analyses of multiple-use forestry decisions have explicitly or implicitly adopted the view that multiple-use should be achieved in individual stands. Each stand should be managed to produce an optimal mix of timber products and nontimber goods. Another view of multiple-use forestry is to manage each stand for a primary use, whereas multiple-use concerns are addressed by allocating different stands in a forest to different uses. A general argument in support of the primary-use view is that specialization makes for efficiency. The production of timber and nontimber goods is a joint process, however. Strictly speaking, one cannot separate timber production and the production of different nontimber goods. For example, managing a stand for timber production does not exclude the possibility of producing some nontimber goods in the stand. Since every stand usually produces more than one product, efficient multiple-use forestry requires that each stand should be managed for an optimal mix of timber and nontimber outputs. On the other hand, it may well be the case that the optimal multiple-use mix for a particular stand consists of a maximum output of one product. In this case the optimal multiple-use management decision would coincide with the optimal decision pertaining to a single use. In other words, it may be optimal to manage a particular stand for one primary use. Using the terminology of economics, primary-use may be efficient for stands in which the multiple-use production set is nonconvex. Recent research has explored several sources of nonconvexity in the multiple-use production set. However, there is no evidence supporting the argument that specialization is always more efficient than multiple-use management of individual stands. From an economics viewpoint, efficient primary-use is special cases of multiple-use stand management.A widely recognized limitation of multiple-use stand management is that, by considering each stand separately, one neglects the interdependence of nontimber benefits and ecological interactions among individual stands. The nontimber benefits of a stand depend on the output of nontimber goods from other stands. Likewise, the nontimber output from one stand affects the value of nontimber goods produced in the other stands. Ecological interactions among individual stands imply that the output of nontimber goods from two stands in a forest differs from the sum of the outputs from two isolated stands. These interdependence and interactions imply that the relationship between the nontimber benefits of a stand and the stand age (or standing timber stock) cannot be unambiguously determined - it depends on the flow of nontimber goods produced in the surrounding stands. Therefore, it is improper to determine optimal decisions for the individual stands independently. In stead, efficient multiple-use forestry decision should be analyzed by considering all the stands in a forest simultaneously.Another serious limitation of multiple-use stand management is that each stand is treated as a homogenous management unit to be managed according to a uniform management regime. One implicitly assumes that the boundaries of each stand is exogenously given and will remain unchanged over time. This assumption imposes a restriction on the multiple-use production set, thereby creates inefficiency. As an example, consider a large stand with a nonconvex production set. It may be possible to eliminate nonconvexity in the production set and push the production possibility frontier outwards by dividing the stand into several parts and managing each part for a primary-use. It may also be efficient to combine two adjacent stands into one to be managed following a uniform regime, because of the presences of fixed management costs, and/or because the relationship between some nontimber outputs and stand area is not linear.In contrast to income from timber production, nontimber goods produced at different time points are not perfect substitutes. The rate at which a forest owner is willing to substitute a nontimber good produced at one time point for that produced at another time point changes with the outputs of the nontimber good at the two time points. In general cases, the nontimber goods produced at one time point cannot be consumed at another time point, and the marginal utility of a nontimber good decreases when its output increases. This provides a motivation for reducing the variation in the output of nontimber goods over time. An effective approach to coordinating nontimber outputs over time is to apply different management regimes to different parts of a stand, or apply the same regime to adjacent stands, which would change the boundaries of the stands. Preserving the existing stand boundaries would limit the possibility of evening out the nontimber outputs over time, and thereby lead to intertemporal inefficiency in multiple-use management.In previous studies of multiple-use forestry decisions the nontimber outputs or benefits are usually modeled as functions of stand age or standing timber stock. Future flows of nontimber goods or benefits are incorporated into a stand/forest harvest decision model to explore the implications of nontimber uses for optimal harvest decisions. While stand age and standing timber stock may have significant impacts on nontimber outputs, other forest state variables, e. g. the spatial distribution of stands of different ages/species, may be of great importance to the production of nontimber goods. Recognition of such forest state variables could change the relationship between timber production and nontimber outputs and therefore change the optimal forest management decisions.In summary, multiple-use forestry is not simply an extension of timber management with additional flows of benefits to be considered when evaluating alternative management regimes. Recognition of multiple uses of a forest leads to two fundamental changes of the forestry decision problem. First, the optimal intertemporal consumption of forestry income is no longer separable from forest management decisions. In general, the optimal intertemporal consumption of forestry income depends on future flows of nontimber goods, implying that the consumption-saving decision should be made simultaneously with the decision on the production of timber and nontimber goods over time. Secondly, it is no longer appropriate to optimize the management regime for each stand separately. The nontimber outputs from a forest depend on the age distribution of individual stands, and on a wide range of other forest state variables such as the spatial distribution of stands of different ages and tree-species composition. Ecological interactions and interdependence among stands imply that management regimes for different stands should be optimized simultaneously. In addition to changing rotation ages and harvest levels, efficient multiple-use forestry requires optimizing the spatial allocation of harvests, redefining the boundaries of stands, coordinating the choices of tree species in regeneration of harvested area and so on.The lack of rigorous production functions for nontimber goods imposes a severe restriction on attempts to perform comprehensive economic analyses of multiple-use forestry decisions. This restriction in itself is no justification for ignoring many of the key aspects of multiple-use forestry problem and modeling the problem as one of determining the optimal rotation age or optimal harvest level. It requires that economic models of multiple-use forestry should be developed with special consideration of the vague and imprecise information regarding the relationships between nontimber outputs and forest state variables.Peichen GongDepartment of Forest EconomicsSE-90183 UmeåSweden     

Faustmann and the climate

The paper presents an adjusted Faustmann Rule for optimal harvest of a forest when there is a social cost of carbon emissions. The theoretical framework takes account of the dynamics and interactions of forests’ multiple carbon pools and assumes an infinite time horizon. Our paper provides a theoretical foundation for numerical model studies that have found that a social cost of carbon implies longer optimal rotation periods and that if the social cost of carbon exceeds a certain threshold value the forest should not be harvested. At the same time we show that it could be a net social benefit from harvesting even if the commercial profit from harvest is negative. If that is the case, the optimal harvest age is decreasing in the social cost of carbon.     

Sequester or substitute—Consequences of increased production of wood based energy on the carbon balance in Finland

Forests play an important role in mitigating climate change. Forests can sequester carbon from the atmosphere and provide biomass, which can be used to substitute for fossil fuels or energy-intensive materials. International climate policies favor the use of wood to substitute for fossil fuels rather than using forests as carbon sink. We examine the trade off between sequestering carbon in forests and substituting wood for fossil fuels in Finland. For Finland to meet its EU targets for the use of renewable energy by 2020, a considerable increase in the use of wood for energy is necessary. We compare scenarios in which the wood energy targets are fully or partially met to a reference case where policies favoring wood based energy production are removed. Three models are used to project fossil fuel substitution and changes in forest carbon sinks in the scenarios through 2035.Finnish forests are a growing carbon sink in all scenarios. However, net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will be higher in the medium term if Finland achieves its current wood energy targets than if the use of energy wood stagnates or decreases. The volume of GHG emissions avoided by replacing coal, peat and fossil diesel with wood is outweighed by the loss in carbon sequestered in forests due to increased biomass removals. Therefore, the current wood energy targets seem excessive and harmful to the climate. In particular, biodiesel production has a significant, negative impact on net emissions in the period considered. However, we did not consider risks such as forest fires, wind damage and diseases, which might weaken the sequestration policy. The potential albedo impacts of harvesting the forests were not considered either.     

Effects of litigation under the Endangered Species Act on forest firm values

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) has been a source of litigation and subject to court interpretation during the past several decades. In this study, event analysis was employed to examine the impact of six court decisions related to the ESA on the financial performance of U.S. forest products firms. The finding of abnormal returns revealed that all six events generated the expected positive or negative returns, and among them, four were statistically significant. Changes in systematic risk reflected the reaction of the stock market to the verdict announcements. Programs designed for habitat conservation can be implemented to compensate private landowners or firms for costs associated with protecting species on private forestlands.     

Biodiversity Conservation and Productivity in Intensive Agricultural Systems

This paper explores the economic effects of biodiversity loss on marketable agricultural output for intensive agricultural systems, which require an increasing level of artificial capital inputs. A theoretical bio‐economic model is used to derive a hypothesis about the effect of the state of biodiversity on the optimal crop output both in the longer run and in the transitional path towards the steady‐state equilibrium. The hypothesised positive relationship between biodiversity stock and optimal levels of crop output is empirically tested using a stochastic production frontier approach, based on data from a panel of UK specialised cereal farms for the period 1989–2000. The results support the theoretical hypothesis. Increases in biodiversity can lead to a continual outward shift in the output frontier (although at a decreasing rate), controlling for the relevant set of labour and capital inputs. Agricultural transition towards biodiversity conservation may be consistent with an increase in crop output in already biodiversity‐poor modern agricultural landscapes.