IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v54y2005i1p23-35.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The dynamics of carbon sequestration and alternative carbon accounting, with an application to the upper Mississippi River Basin

Author

Listed:
  • Feng, Hongli

Abstract

Carbon sequestration is a temporal process in which carbon is continuously being stored/released over a period of time. Different methods of carbon accounting can be used to account for this temporal nature including annual average carbon, annualized carbon, and ton-year carbon. In this paper, starting by exposing the underlying connections among these methods, we examine how the comparisons of sequestration projects are affected by these methods and the major factors affecting them. We explore the empirical implications on carbon sequestration policies by applying these accounting methods to the Upper Mississippi River Basin, a large and important agriculture area in the US. We found that the differences are significant in terms of the location of land that might be chosen and the distribution of carbon sequestration over the area, although the total amount of carbon sequestered does not differ considerably across programs that use different accounting methods or different values of the major factors.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Feng, Hongli, 2005. "The dynamics of carbon sequestration and alternative carbon accounting, with an application to the upper Mississippi River Basin," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 23-35, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:54:y:2005:i:1:p:23-35
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(05)00098-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Peter J. Parks & Ian W. Hardie, 1995. "Least-Cost Forest Carbon Reserves: Cost-Effective Subsidies to Convert Marginal Agricultural Land to Forests," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 71(1), pages 122-136.
    2. Saak, Alexander & Hennessy, David A., 2001. "Well-behaved cash flows," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 81-88, October.
    3. Douglas J. Miller, 1999. "An Econometric Analysis of the Costs of Sequestering Carbon in Forests," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(4), pages 812-824.
    4. Pedro Moura Costa & Charlie Wilson, 2000. "An equivalence factor between CO2 avoidedemissions and sequestration – description andapplications in forestry," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 51-60, March.
    5. Philip Fearnside & Daniel Lashof & Pedro Moura-Costa, 2000. "Accounting for time in Mitigating Global Warming through land-use change and forestry," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 239-270, September.
    6. Darius M. Adams & Ralph J. Alig & DBruce A. McCarl & John M. Callaway & Steven M. Winnett, 1999. "Minimum Cost Strategies for Sequestering Carbon in Forests," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(3), pages 360-374.
    7. Hongli Feng & Lyubov A. Kurkalova & Catherine L. Kling & Philip W. Gassman, 2004. "Environmental Conservation in Agriculture: Land Retirement versus Changing Practices on Working Land," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 04-wp365, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    8. Kilaparti Ramakrishna, 1997. "The great debate on CO2 emissions," Nature, Nature, vol. 390(6657), pages 227-228, November.
    9. Oehmke, James F., 2000. "Anomalies in net present value calculations," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 349-351, June.
    10. 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.
    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. Nobuhiko Fuwa & Asa Jose U. Sajise, 2009. "Exploring Environmental Services Incentive Policies for the Philippines Rice Sector: The Case of Intra-Species Agrobiodiversity Conservation," Natural Resource Management and Policy, in: Leslie Lipper & Takumi Sakuyama & Randy Stringer & David Zilberman (ed.), Payment for Environmental Services in Agricultural Landscapes, chapter 10, pages 221-238, Springer.
    2. Hongli Feng & Catherine L. Kling, 2005. "The Consequences of Cobenefits for the Efficient Design of Carbon Sequestration Programs," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(4), pages 461-476, December.
    3. Jimena González-Ramírez & Catherine L. Kling & Adriana Valcu, 2012. "An Overview of Carbon Offsets from Agriculture," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 145-160, August.
    4. Yi Xiao & Jinqi Zhao & Siqi Sun & Luo Guo & Jan Axmacher & Weiguo Sang, 2019. "Sustainability Dynamics of Traditional Villages: A Case Study in Qiannan Prefecture, Guizhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    5. Sharma, Bijay P. & Khanna, Madhu & Miao, Ruiqing, 2022. "Designing Efficient Payments to Incentivize GHG Mitigation Using Energy Crops," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322361, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Annie Levasseur & Pascal Lesage & Manuele Margni & Miguel Brandão & Réjean Samson, 2012. "Assessing temporary carbon sequestration and storage projects through land use, land-use change and forestry: comparison of dynamic life cycle assessment with ton-year approaches," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 759-776, December.
    7. Feng, Hongli & Kling, Catherine L., 2005. "Carbon Sequestration in Agriculture: an Offset Program versus Other Conservation Programs," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19177, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. Dale, Virginia H. & Polasky, Stephen, 2007. "Measures of the effects of agricultural practices on ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 286-296, December.
    9. Adams, Thomas & Turner, James A., 2012. "An investigation into the effects of an emissions trading scheme on forest management and land use in New Zealand," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 78-90.
    10. Timothy Capon & Michael Harris & Andrew Reeson, 2013. "The Design of Markets for Soil Carbon Sequestration," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 32(2), pages 161-173, June.

    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. 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.
    2. Latta, Gregory & Adams, Darius M. & Alig, Ralph J. & White, Eric, 2011. "Simulated effects of mandatory versus voluntary participation in private forest carbon offset markets in the United States," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 127-141, April.
    3. Matthews, Stephen & O'Connor, Raymond & Plantinga, Andrew J., 2002. "Quantifying the impacts on biodiversity of policies for carbon sequestration in forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 71-87, January.
    4. 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.
    5. 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).
    6. Stavins, Robert & Plantinga, Andrew & Lubowski, Ruben, 2005. "Land-Use Change and Carbon Sinks," RFF Working Paper Series dp-05-04, Resources for the Future.
    7. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Eagle, Alison J. & Manley, James G. & Smolak, Tara M., 2004. "How Costly Are Carbon Offsets? A Meta-Analysis Of Carbon Forest Sinks," Working Papers 18166, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    8. 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.
    9. Im, Eun Ho & Adams, Darius M. & Latta, Gregory S., 2007. "Potential impacts of carbon taxes on carbon flux in western Oregon private forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 1006-1017, May.
    10. Lubowski, Ruben N. & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Stavins, Robert N., 2006. "Land-use change and carbon sinks: Econometric estimation of the carbon sequestration supply function," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 135-152, March.
    11. Kim, Taeyoung & Langpap, Christian, 2016. "Agricultural landowners’ response to incentives for afforestation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 93-111.
    12. Charles A. Zelek & Gerald E. Shively, 2003. "Measuring the Opportunity Cost of Carbon Sequestration in Tropical Agriculture," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(3), pages 342-354.
    13. 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.
    14. Kim, Man-Keun & McCarl, Bruce A. & Murray, Brian C., 2008. "Permanence discounting for land-based carbon sequestration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 763-769, February.
    15. Taeyoung Kim & Christian Langpap, 2015. "Incentives for Carbon Sequestration Using Forest Management," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(3), pages 491-520, November.
    16. Schneider, Uwe A. & McCarl, Bruce A. & Schmid, Erwin, 2007. "Agricultural sector analysis on greenhouse gas mitigation in US agriculture and forestry," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 128-140, May.
    17. Yemshanov, Denys & McCarney, Geoffrey R. & Hauer, Grant & Luckert, M.K. (Marty) & Unterschultz, Jim & McKenney, Daniel W., 2015. "A real options-net present value approach to assessing land use change: A case study of afforestation in Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 327-336.
    18. 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.
    19. Chadourne, Matthew H. & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Roberts, Roland K., 2011. "Ridge, Slope, and Hillside Protection Taskforce Projects in Knox County, Tennessee: Costs and Benefits of Reforestation of Target Areas," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103846, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Sullivan, Jay & Aggett, Jonathan & Amacher, Greg & Burger, James, 2005. "Financial viability of reforesting reclaimed surface mined lands, the burden of site conversion costs, and carbon payments as reforestation incentives," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 247-258, December.

    More about this item

    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:eee:ecolec:v:54:y:2005:i:1:p:23-35. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.