IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ajarec/v55y2011i4p537-559.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Gregmar I. Galinato
  • Aaron Olanie
  • Shinsuke Uchida
  • Jonathan K. Yoder

Abstract

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.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Gregmar I. Galinato & Aaron Olanie & Shinsuke Uchida & Jonathan K. Yoder, 2011. "Long‐term versus temporary certified emission reductions in forest carbon sequestration programs," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(4), pages 537-559, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ajarec:v:55:y:2011:i:4:p:537-559
    DOI: j.1467-8489.2011.00555.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-8489.2011.00555.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/j.1467-8489.2011.00555.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heng‐Chi Lee & Bruce A. McCarl & Dhazn Gillig, 2005. "The Dynamic Competitiveness of U.S. Agricultural and Forest Carbon Sequestration," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(4), pages 343-357, December.
    2. Michael Dutschke & Bernhard Schlamadinger & Jenny L.P. Wong & Michael Rumberg, 2005. "Value and risks of expiring carbon credits from afforestation and reforestation projects under the CDM," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 109-125, January.
    3. William D. Nordhaus, 1991. "The Cost of Slowing Climate Change: a Survey," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 37-66.
    4. M. Germain & A. Magnus & V. Steenberghe, 2007. "How to design and use the clean development mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol? A developing country perspective," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 13-30, September.
    5. Spring, Daniel & Kennedy, John O.S. & Mac Nally, Ralph, 2005. "Optimal management of a flammable forest providing timber and carbon sequestration benefits: an Australian case study," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(3), pages 1-18.
    6. Tol, Richard S. J., 2005. "The marginal damage costs of carbon dioxide emissions: an assessment of the uncertainties," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(16), pages 2064-2074, November.
    7. 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.
    8. Oscar J. Cacho & Robyn L. Hean & Russell M. Wise, 2003. "Carbon‐accounting methods and reforestation incentives," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(2), pages 153-179, June.
    9. Graeme Guthrie & Dinesh Kumareswaran, 2009. "Carbon Subsidies, Taxes and Optimal Forest Management," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 275-293, June.
    10. Gregmar I. Galinato & Shinsuke Uchida, 2011. "The Effect of Temporary Certified Emission Reductions on Forest Rotations and Carbon Supply," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 59(1), pages 145-164, March.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    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. Juutinen, Artti & Ahtikoski, Anssi & Lehtonen, Mika & Mäkipää, Raisa & Ollikainen, Markku, 2018. "The impact of a short-term carbon payment scheme on forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 115-127.
    2. Yue‐Jun Zhang & Jing‐Yue Liu & Richard T. Woodward, 2023. "Has Chinese Certified Emission Reduction trading reduced rural poverty in China?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 67(3), pages 438-458, July.
    3. Mandaloufas, Melissa & Lamas, Wendell de Queiroz & Brown, Scott & Irizarry Quintero, Anamari, 2015. "Energy balance analysis of the Brazilian alcohol for flex fuel production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 403-414.
    4. Hou, Guolong & Delang, Claudio O. & Lu, Xixi & Olschewski, Roland, 2020. "Optimizing rotation periods of forest plantations: The effects of carbon accounting regimes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Cacho, Oscar J. & Lipper, Leslie & Moss, Jonathan, 2013. "Transaction costs of carbon offset projects: A comparative study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 232-243.

    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. Juutinen, Artti & Ahtikoski, Anssi & Lehtonen, Mika & Mäkipää, Raisa & Ollikainen, Markku, 2018. "The impact of a short-term carbon payment scheme on forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 115-127.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Hou, Guolong & Delang, Claudio O. & Lu, Xixi & Olschewski, Roland, 2020. "Optimizing rotation periods of forest plantations: The effects of carbon accounting regimes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    6. Gulati, Sumeet & Vercammen, James, 2005. "The Optimal Length of an Agricultural Carbon Contract," Working Papers 37027, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    7. 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.
    8. Wise, Russell M. & Cacho, Oscar J., 2008. "Bioeconomic meta-modelling of Indonesian agroforests as carbon sinks," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 6772, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    9. 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.
    10. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Laaksonen-Craig, Susanna & Wang, Yichuan, 2007. "Costs of Creating Carbon Offset Credits via Forestry Activities: A Meta-Regression Analysis," Working Papers 37039, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    11. Djanibekov, Utkur & Khamzina, Asia & Djanibekov, Nodir & Lamers, John P.A., 2012. "How attractive are short-term CDM forestations in arid regions? The case of irrigated croplands in Uzbekistan," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 108-117.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Köthke, Margret & Dieter, Matthias, 2010. "Effects of carbon sequestration rewards on forest management--An empirical application of adjusted Faustmann Formulae," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(8), pages 589-597, October.
    15. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Sohngen, Brent, 2007. "Economics of Forest Ecosystem Carbon Sinks: A Review," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 1(3), pages 237-269, September.
    16. Asante, Patrick & Armstrong, Glen W. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L., 2011. "Carbon sequestration and the optimal forest harvest decision: A dynamic programming approach considering biomass and dead organic matter," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 3-17, January.
    17. Sumeet Gulati & James Vercammen, 2005. "The Optimal Length of an Agricultural Carbon Contract," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(4), pages 359-373, December.
    18. Tommi Ekholm, 2019. "Optimal forest rotation under carbon pricing and forest damage risk," Papers 1912.00269, arXiv.org.
    19. Lint Barrage, 2019. "The Nobel Memorial Prize for William D. Nordhaus," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(3), pages 884-924, July.
    20. Sedjo, Roger A., 2001. "Forest Carbon Sequestration: Some Issues for Forest Investments," Discussion Papers 10571, Resources for the Future.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • 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:bla:ajarec:v:55:y:2011:i:4:p:537-559. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.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.