Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-544b6db54f-jcwnq Total loading time: 0.183 Render date: 2021-10-21T15:21:44.107Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

The Costs and Benefits of Intensive Forest Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 January 2015

Runar Brännlund
Affiliation:
Centre for Environmental and Resource Economics, Umeå University
Ola Carlén
Affiliation:
Department of Forest Economics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Tommy Lundgren
Affiliation:
Centre for Environmental and Resource Economics, Umeå University
Per-Olov Marklund
Affiliation:
Centre for Environmental and Resource Economics, Umeå University
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

HTML view is not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This paper presents an approach for studying the socio-economic benefits and costs (CBA) of the introduction of intensified management measures in forestry. Besides from valuation of changes in timber production, assessments of different types of externalities are included in the assessment. The model is exemplified with the use of data from a Swedish governmental study undertaken in 2009 which present impacts on the Swedish forest sector if intensified management measures are applied on environmentally low-valued land and abandoned agricultural lands. The CBA shows that intensified management measures typically are private financially profitable. If these measures also become profitable from the society’s point of view depend on the size of the external effects including carbon balance.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis 2012

References

Bickel, P. and Friedrich, R. (eds.) (2005) Extern E – Externalities of Energy – Methodology 2005 Update, EUR 21951, EN, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, ISBN-92-79-00423-9. Available at: www.externe.info/brussels/methup05a.pdf (April 12, 2011).Google Scholar
Brännlund, R., Carlén, O., Lundgren, T. and Marklund, P.-O. (2009) Samhällsekonomiska konsekvenser av intensivodling, faktaunderlag till MINT-utredningen, SLU, Rapport, ISBN 978-91-86197-44-5 (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Cherubini, F., Peters, G.P., Berntsen, T., Strømman, A.H. and Hertwich, E. (2011) CO2 Emissions from Biomass Combustion for Bioenergy: Atmospheric Decay and Contribution to Global Warming, GCB Bioenergy, doi: 10.1111/j.1757-1707.2011.01102.x.Google Scholar
Clarkson, R. and Deyes, K. (2002) Estimating the Social Cost of Carbon Emissions, The Public Enquiry Unit – HM Treasury, London, Working Paper 140.Google Scholar
Drake, L. (1992) The Non-Market Value of Agricultural Landscape, European Review of Agricultural Economics, 19(3), 351361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drake, L. (1999) The Swedish Agricultural Landscape – Economic Characteristics, Valuation and Policy Option, International Journal of Social Economics, 26, 10421060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahlvik, N., Johansson, U. and Nilsson, U. (2009) Skogsskötsel för ökad tillväxt. Faktaunderlag till MINT-utredningen, SLU, Rapport, ISBN 978-91-86197-43-8 (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Geijer, E., Bostedt, G. and Brännlund, R. (2011) Damned if you do Damned if you do not – Reduced Climate Impact vs. Sustainable Forests in Sweden, Resource and Energy Economics, 33(4), 94106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Government Bill, 1992–1993: 226 om en ny skogspolitik (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Government Bill 2007–2008: 108 En skogspolitik i takt med tiden (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Gundersen, V.S. and Frivold, L.H. (2008) Public Preferences for Forest Structures: A Review of Quantitative Surveys from Finland, Norway and Sweden, Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 7(4), 241258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanley, N. and Barbier, E.B. (2009) Pricing Nature: Cost-Benefit Analysis and Environmental Policy, Edward Elgar Publishing. Cheltenham, UK..Google Scholar
Hoen, H.F. and Solberg, B. (1994) Potential and Economic Efficiency of Carbon Sequestration in Forest Biomass Through Silvicultural Management, Forest Science, 40(3), 429451.Google Scholar
Holgén, P. and Mattsson, L. (2000) Recreation Values of Boreal Forest Stand Types and Landscapes Resulting from Different Silvicultural Systems: An Economic Analysis, Journal of Environmental Management, 60(2), 173180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooper, D.U., Chapin, III, F.S., Ewel, J.J., Hector, A., Inchausti, P., Lavorel, S., Lawton, J.H., Lodge, D.M., Loreau, M., Naeem, S., Schmid, B., Setälä, H., Symstad, A.J., Vandermeer, J., and Wardle, D.A. (2005) Effects of Biodiversity on Ecosystem Functioning: A Consensus of Current Knowledge, Ecological Monographs, 75(1), 335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johansson, P.-O. (1993) Cost-Benefit Analysis of Environmental Change, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsson, S., Lundmark, T. and Ståhl, G. (2009) Möjligheter till intensivodling av skog, slutrapport från regeringsuppdrag, Jo 2008/1885 (summary in English).Google Scholar
Lundgren, T. and Marklund, P.-O. (2012) Assessing the Welfare Effects of Promoting Biomass Growth and the Use of Bioenergy, Climate Change Economics, in press.Google Scholar
Lundgren, T., Marklund, P.-O., Brännlund, R. and Kriström, B. (2008) The Economics of Biofuels, International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, 237280.Google Scholar
Lundström, A. and Glimskär, A. (2009) Definitioner, tillgängliga arealer och konsekvensberäkningar. Faktaunderlag till MINT-utredningen, SLU, Rapport, ISBN 978-91-86197-42-1 (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Mattsson, L. and Li, C.-Z. (1993) The Non-timber Value of Northern Swedish Forests: An Economic Analysis, Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 8, 426434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattsson, L., Boman, M. and Eriksson, G. (2008) Jakten i Sverige – Ekonomiska värden och attityder jaktåret 2005/2006, Rapport från Adaptiv förvaltning av vilt och fisk, Rapport nr: 1, februari 2008, Umeå (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Mattsson, L., Boman, M. and Eriksson, G. (2009) Så mycket är jakten värd, Svensk Jakt (http://www.jagareforbundet.se/svenskjakt/artiklaromforsk/nr5samycketa rja.asp) (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Nordhaus, W. (2008) A Question of Balance – Weighing the Options on Global Warming Policies, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
Pearce, D. (2003) The Social Cost of Carbon and its Policy Implications, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 19(3), 362384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nilsson, U., Fahlvik, N., Johansson, U., Lundström, A. and Rosvall, O. (2011) Simulation of the Effect of Intensive Forest Management on Forest Production in Sweden, Forests, 2, 373393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearse, P.H. (1990) Introduction to Forestry Economics. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searchinger, T.D., Hamburg, S.P., Melillo, J., Chameides, W., Havlik, P., Kammen, D.M., Likens, G.E., Lubowski, R.N., Oberstainer, M., Oppenheimer, M., Robertson, G.P., Schlesinger, W.H. and Tilman, G.D. (2009) Fixing a Critical Climate Accounting Error, Science, 326(5952), 527528.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sedjo, R.A., Sampson, R.N. and Wisniewski, J. (1997) Economics of Carbon Sequestration in Forestry, Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 27/Special Issue.Google Scholar
Simonsen, R., Rosvall, O., Gong, P. and Wibe, S. (2010) Profitability of Measures to Increase Forest Growth, Forest Policy and Economics, 12(6), 473482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SOU 2006: 81 Mervärdesskog, Statens Offentliga Utredningar 2006: 81 (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Swedish Board of Forestry (2007) Kvävegödsling av skogsmark, Meddelande nr 2, 2007 (in Swedish).Google Scholar
Tol, R.S.J. (2005) The Marginal Damage Costs of Carbon Dioxide Emissions: An Assessment of the Uncertainties, Energy Policy, 33, 20642074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tol, R.S.J. (2008) The Social Cost of Carbon: Trends, Outliers and Catastrophes, Economics, The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, 2, 124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Kooten, G.C. (2004) Climate Change Economics. Why International Accords Fail, Edgar Elgar: Northampton, MA.Google Scholar
You have Access
4
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The Costs and Benefits of Intensive Forest Management
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

The Costs and Benefits of Intensive Forest Management
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

The Costs and Benefits of Intensive Forest Management
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *