IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

An investigation into the effects of an emissions trading scheme on forest management and land use in New Zealand

Listed author(s):
  • Adams, Thomas
  • Turner, James A.
Registered author(s):

    An econometric-process simulation model was constructed to investigate the effects of an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) on forest management and land use in New Zealand. Profit maximising agents which choose between forestry and agricultural land uses were simulated under carbon price scenarios of $20, $50 and $0 per tonne CO2 equivalent. The model suggests that an ETS will lead to increased afforestation and rotation age, and decreased silviculture and deforestation. A $20 carbon price or higher led to an overall increase in carbon sequestration by the forestry sector, driven predominantly by afforestation on lower fertility sites. Higher carbon prices increase the range of available land for planting. Future carbon price expectancy was critical. Rising carbon price expectancy led to large scale afforestation, but also to significant deforestation. A falling expectancy prevented deforestation but also stifled afforestation. The most sustainable solution was a stable carbon price expectancy allowing land to consistently work towards an economically optimal use. The recommendation of this report is for policy which promotes a stable long-run carbon price and flexibility for change between land uses. Suggestions include a guaranteed maximum carbon price, or allowing a forest to be felled at reduced penalty if another is concurrently planted.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934111001651
    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 under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Forest Policy and Economics.

    Volume (Year): 15 (2012)
    Issue (Month): C ()
    Pages: 78-90

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:15:y:2012:i:c:p:78-90
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2011.09.010
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as
    in new window


    1. Pfaff, Alexander S. P. & Kerr, Suzi & Hughes, R. Flint & Liu, Shuguang & Sanchez-Azofeifa, G. Arturo & Schimel, David & Tosi, Joseph & Watson, Vicente, 2000. "The Kyoto protocol and payments for tropical forest:: An interdisciplinary method for estimating carbon-offset supply and increasing the feasibility of a carbon market under the CDM," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 203-221, November.
    2. Edwin van der Werf & Sonja Peterson, 2009. "Modeling linkages between climate policy and land use: an overview," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(5), pages 507-517, 09.
    3. John M. Antle & Susan M. Capalbo, 2001. "Econometric-Process Models for Integrated Assessment of Agricultural Production Systems," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(2), pages 389-401.
    4. Sabina L. Shaikh & Lili Sun & G. Cornelis van Kooten, 2007. "Are Agricultural Values a Reliable Guide in Determining Landowners' Decisions to Create Forest Carbon Sinks?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 55(1), pages 97-114, 03.
    5. 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.
    6. Suzi Kerr & Shuguang Liu & Alexander S. P. Pfaff & R. Flint Hughes, 2003. "Carbon Dynamics and Land-Use Choices: Building a Regional-Scale Multidisciplinary Model," Working Papers 03_06, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    7. Steven Stillman, 2005. "Examining Changes in the Value of Rural Land in New Zealand between 1989 and 2003," Urban/Regional 0509015, EconWPA.
    8. Robert Pontius & Wideke Boersma & Jean-Christophe Castella & Keith Clarke & Ton Nijs & Charles Dietzel & Zengqiang Duan & Eric Fotsing & Noah Goldstein & Kasper Kok & Eric Koomen & Christopher Lippitt, 2008. "Comparing the input, output, and validation maps for several models of land change," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 42(1), pages 11-37, March.
    9. 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.
    10. Hartman, Richard, 1976. "The Harvesting Decision When a Standing Forest Has Value," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 14(1), pages 52-58, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Joanna Hendy & Suzi Kerr & Troy Baisden, 2007. "The Land Use in Rural New Zealand Model Version 1 (LURNZv1: Model Description)," Working Papers 07_07, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    13. 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.
    14. Uwe A. Schneider & Bruce A. McCarl, 2006. "Appraising agricultural greenhouse gas mitigation potentials: effects of alternative assumptions," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 35(3), pages 277-287, November.
    15. Huang, Ching-Hsun & Kronrad, Gary D., 2001. "The cost of sequestering carbon on private forest lands," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 133-142, June.
    16. Hongli Feng, 2005. "Dynamics of Carbon Sequestration and Alternative Carbon Accounting, with an Application to the Upper Mississippi River Basin, The," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 05-wp386, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    17. Gutrich, John & Howarth, Richard B., 2007. "Carbon sequestration and the optimal management of New Hampshire timber stands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 441-450, May.
    18. 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.
    19. G. Cornelis van Kooten & Alison Eagle & James Manley & Tara Smolak, 2004. "How Costly are Carbon Offsets? A Meta-Analysis of Forest Carbon Sinks," Working Papers 2004-01, University of Victoria, Department of Economics, Resource Economics and Policy Analysis Research Group.
    20. Charles Bourque & Eric Neilson & Chris Gruenwald & Samantha Perrin & Jason Hiltz & Yvon Blin & Geoffrey Horsman & Matthew Parker & Christie Thorburn & Michael Corey & Fan-rui Meng & D. Swift, 2007. "Optimizing carbon sequestration in commercial forests by integrating carbon management objectives in wood supply modeling," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 12(7), pages 1253-1275, August.
    21. Antle, John M. & Capalbo, Susan Marie & Mooney, Sian & Elliott, Edward T. & Paustian, Keith H., 2001. "Economic Analysis Of Agricultural Soil Carbon Sequestration: An Integrated Assessment Approach," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(02), December.
    22. 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.
    23. 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)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:15:y:2012:i:c:p:78-90. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.