IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v171y2025ics138993412400251x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic gain of genetically-selected coastal Douglas-fir: Timber, log and carbon value at varying planting densities

Author

Listed:
  • Isaac-Renton, M.
  • Moore, B.
  • Degner, J.
  • Bealle Statland, C.
  • Bogdanski, B.
  • Sun, L.
  • Stoehr, M.

Abstract

Substantial investments in tree breeding for coastal Douglas-fir in British Columbia are projected to lead to significant volume gain at rotation age. Recent research shows growth gains are accumulating as expected, but it is less clear to what degree and when these volume gains translate into economic gains. We use discounted cash flow analysis techniques to quantify economic gains and determine optimal rotation ages expected from planting three levels of genetic gain in tree volume (a 0 % control, +10 % and + 18 %) at four initial densities (625, 1189, 1890 and 3906 stems/ha). Valuations were estimated for a variety of economic conditions for timber volume and log grades, with and without carbon pricing. These analyses rely on a growth and yield model simulating data from a 21-year coastal Douglas-fir realized gain trial, installed on five sites differing in productivity. Simulations show that planting selectively-bred coastal Douglas-fir trees reliably led to significant economic gains relative to unselected control stands, across initial planting densities, sites and varied economic scenarios. Highest financial returns are projected for genetically-selected seedlings at the most productive sites. Lower initial planting densities were associated with higher economic gains but also reduced important wood quality metrics that were not captured by the financial analyses, suggesting that operational planting densities (1189–1890 stems/ha) could offer a suitable compromise. Incorporating carbon prices led to larger economic returns and longer rotations. Altogether, these simulations suggest that a reliably higher return on investment can be achieved by deploying selectively-bred planting stock.

Suggested Citation

  • Isaac-Renton, M. & Moore, B. & Degner, J. & Bealle Statland, C. & Bogdanski, B. & Sun, L. & Stoehr, M., 2025. "Economic gain of genetically-selected coastal Douglas-fir: Timber, log and carbon value at varying planting densities," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:171:y:2025:i:c:s138993412400251x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103397
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138993412400251X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103397?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhen Xu & Carolyn E. Smyth & Tony C. Lemprière & Greg J. Rampley & Werner A. Kurz, 2018. "Climate change mitigation strategies in the forest sector: biophysical impacts and economic implications in British Columbia, Canada," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 257-290, February.
    2. Kim, Man-Keun & McCarl, Bruce A., 2009. "Uncertainty Discounting for Land-Based Carbon Sequestration," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(1), pages 1-11, April.
    3. Asante, Patrick & Armstrong, Glen W., 2012. "Optimal forest harvest age considering carbon sequestration in multiple carbon pools: A comparative statics analysis," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 145-156.
    4. Adam J. Daigneault & Mario J. Miranda & Brent Sohngen, 2010. "Optimal Forest Management with Carbon Sequestration Credits and Endogenous Fire Risk," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(1), pages 155-172.
    5. Simonsen, Rune & Rosvall, Ola & Gong, Peichen & Wibe, Sören, 2010. "Profitability of measures to increase forest growth," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(6), pages 473-482, July.
    6. Stéphane S. Couture & Arnaud A. Reynaud, 2011. "Forest management under fire risk when forest carbon sequestration has value," Post-Print hal-02651317, HAL.
    7. Kurz, W.A. & Dymond, C.C. & White, T.M. & Stinson, G. & Shaw, C.H. & Rampley, G.J. & Smyth, C. & Simpson, B.N. & Neilson, E.T. & Trofymow, J.A. & Metsaranta, J. & Apps, M.J., 2009. "CBM-CFS3: A model of carbon-dynamics in forestry and land-use change implementing IPCC standards," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(4), pages 480-504.
    8. D.W. McKenney & W. Vuuren & G.C. Fox, 1989. "An Economic Comparison of Alternative Tree Improvement Strategies: A Simulation Approach," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 37(2), pages 211-232, July.
    9. Rupert Seidl & Dominik Thom & Markus Kautz & Dario Martin-Benito & Mikko Peltoniemi & Giorgio Vacchiano & Jan Wild & Davide Ascoli & Michal Petr & Juha Honkaniemi & Manfred J. Lexer & Volodymyr Trotsi, 2017. "Forest disturbances under climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 7(6), pages 395-402, June.
    10. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Johnston, Craig & Mokhtarzadeh, Fatemeh, 2019. "Carbon Uptake and Forest Management under Uncertainty: Why Natural Disturbance Matters," Journal of Forest Economics, now publishers, vol. 34(1-2), pages 159-185, August.
    11. Ekholm, Tommi, 2016. "Optimal forest rotation age under efficient climate change mitigation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 62-68.
    12. Markus Reichstein & Michael Bahn & Philippe Ciais & Dorothea Frank & Miguel D. Mahecha & Sonia I. Seneviratne & Jakob Zscheischler & Christian Beer & Nina Buchmann & David C. Frank & Dario Papale & An, 2013. "Climate extremes and the carbon cycle," Nature, Nature, vol. 500(7462), pages 287-295, August.
    13. Ekholm, Tommi, 2020. "Optimal forest rotation under carbon pricing and forest damage risk," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    14. 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.
    15. Geng, Aixin & Yang, Hongqiang & Chen, Jiaxin & Hong, Yinxing, 2017. "Review of carbon storage function of harvested wood products and the potential of wood substitution in greenhouse gas mitigation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P1), pages 192-200.
    16. 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.
    17. Brent Sohngen & Robert Mendelsohn, 2003. "An Optimal Control Model of Forest Carbon Sequestration," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(2), pages 448-457.
    18. Denys Yemshanov & Daniel W. McKenney & Terry Hatton & Glenn Fox, 2005. "Investment Attractiveness of Afforestation in Canada Inclusive of Carbon Sequestration Benefits," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(4), pages 307-323, December.
    19. Sandrine Brèteau-Amores & Rasoul Yousefpour & Marc Hanewinkel & Mathieu Fortin, 2023. "Forest adaptation strategies to reconcile timber production and carbon sequestration objectives under multiple risks of extreme drought and windstorm events," Post-Print hal-04523058, HAL.
    20. Brèteau-Amores, Sandrine & Yousefpour, Rasoul & Hanewinkel, Marc & Fortin, Mathieu, 2023. "Forest adaptation strategies to reconcile timber production and carbon sequestration objectives under multiple risks of extreme drought and windstorm events," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ekholm, Tommi, 2020. "Optimal forest rotation under carbon pricing and forest damage risk," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    2. Tommi Ekholm, 2019. "Optimal forest rotation under carbon pricing and forest damage risk," Papers 1912.00269, arXiv.org.
    3. Susaeta, Andres & Chang, Sun Joseph & Carter, Douglas R. & Lal, Pankaj, 2014. "Economics of carbon sequestration under fluctuating economic environment, forest management and technological changes: An application to forest stands in the southern United States," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 47-64.
    4. Assmuth, Aino & Autto, Hilja & Halonen, Kirsi-Maria & Haltia, Emmi & Huttunen, Suvi & Lintunen, Jussi & Lonkila, Annika & Nieminen, Tiina M. & Ojanen, Paavo & Peltoniemi, Mikko & Pietilä, Kaisa & Pohj, 2024. "Forest carbon payments: A multidisciplinary review of policy options for promoting carbon storage in EU member states," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Ekholm, Tommi, 2016. "Optimal forest rotation age under efficient climate change mitigation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 62-68.
    7. Patto, João V. & Rosa, Renato, 2022. "Adapting to frequent fires: Optimal forest management revisited," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    8. Yu, Zhihan & Ning, Zhuo & Chang, Wei-Yew & Chang, Sun Joseph & Yang, Hongqiang, 2023. "Optimal harvest decisions for the management of carbon sequestration forests under price uncertainty and risk preferences," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    9. Zhou, Mo, 2015. "Adapting sustainable forest management to climate policy uncertainty: A conceptual framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 66-74.
    10. Luo, Li & Gao, Yuan & Regan, Courtney M. & Summers, David M. & Connor, Jeffery D. & O'Hehir, Jim & Meng, Li & Chow, Christopher W.K., 2024. "Emissions offset incentives, carbon storage and profit optimization for Australian timber plantations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    11. Yu, Zhihan & Ning, Zhuo & Zhang, Han & Yang, Hongqiang & Chang, Sun Joseph, 2024. "A generalized Faustmann model with multiple carbon pools," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    12. Gren, Ing-Marie & Carlsson, Mattias & Elofsson, Katarina & Munnich, Miriam, 2012. "Stochastic carbon sinks for combating carbon dioxide emissions in the EU," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1523-1531.
    13. Hoel, Michael & Holtsmark, Bjart & Holtsmark, Katinka, 2014. "Faustmann and the climate," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 192-210.
    14. Lintunen, Jussi & Uusivuori, Jussi, 2014. "On The Economics of Forest Carbon: Renewable and Carbon Neutral But Not Emission Free," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 165755, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    15. Tommi Ekholm, 2015. "Optimal forest rotation age under efficient climate change mitigation," Papers 1505.05669, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2015.
    16. 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).
    17. Peterson St-Laurent, Guillaume & Locatelli, Bruno & Hoberg, George & Gukova, Veronika & Hagerman, Shannon, 2021. "Models for integrating climate objectives in forest policy: Towards adaptation-first?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    18. Susaeta, Andres & Adams, Damian C. & Gonzalez-Benecke, Carlos, 2017. "Economic vulnerability of southern US slash pine forests to climate change," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 18-32.
    19. Gren, Ing-Marie & Zeleke, Abenezer Aklilu, 2016. "Policy design for forest carbon sequestration: A review of the literature," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 128-136.
    20. 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.

    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:forpol:v:171:y:2025:i:c:s138993412400251x. 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/forpol .

    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.