IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Co-Benefits from Carbon Sequestration in Forests: Evaluating Reductions in Agricultural Externalities from an Afforestation Policy in Wisconsin

  • Andrew J. Plantinga
  • JunJie Wu

Besides climate change mitigation, policies encouraging the conversion of agricultural land to forest may generate additional environmental benefits. We estimate the reductions in agricultural externalities (soil erosion, nitrogen, and atrazine pollution) from an afforestation program in Wisconsin. Existing benefits estimates are used to quantify the value of reduced soil erosion and some benefits from enhanced wildlife habitat. These values are the same order of magnitude as the costs of the carbon sequestration policy, indicating that the co-benefits of forest carbon sinks are an important factor for countries to consider in designing a portfolio of climate mitigation strategies.

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://le.uwpress.org/cgi/reprint/79/1/74
Download Restriction: A subscription is required to access pdf files. Pay per article is available.

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 University of Wisconsin Press in its journal Land Economics.

Volume (Year): 79 (2003)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Pages: 74-85

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:79:y:2003:i:1:p:74-85
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://le.uwpress.org/

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. 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.
  2. Aziz Bouzaher & Richard Cabe & Alicia L. Carriquiry & Philip W. Gassman & P. G. Lakshminarayan & Jason F. Shogren, 1992. "Metamodels and Nonpoint Pollution Policy in Agriculture," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 92-wp97, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
  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. 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.
  5. Nordhaus, William D, 1991. "To Slow or Not to Slow: The Economics of the Greenhouse Effect," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(407), pages 920-37, July.
  6. Coiner, Colette & Wu, JunJie & Polasky, Stephen, 2001. "Economic and environmental implications of alternative landscape designs in the Walnut Creek Watershed of Iowa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 119-139, July.
  7. Miller, Douglas & Plantinga, Andrew J., 1999. "Modeling Land Use Decisions with Aggregate Data," Staff General Research Papers 1487, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  8. Crutchfield, Stephen R. & Feather, Peter & Hellerstein, Daniel, 1995. "Benefits of Protecting Rural Water Quality: An Empirical Analysis," Agricultural Economics Reports 33949, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
  9. 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.
  10. Andrew J. Plantinga, 1996. "The Effect of Agricultural Policies on Land Use and Environmental Quality," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(4), pages 1082-1091.
  11. RICHARD M. Adams & DARIUS M. Adams & JOHN M. Callaway & CHING-CHENG Chang & BRUCE A. Mccarl, 1993. "Sequestering Carbon On Agricultural Land: Social Cost And Impacts On Timber Markets," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 11(1), pages 76-87, 01.
  12. Douglas J. Miller & Andrew J. Plantinga, 1999. "Modeling Land Use Decisions with Aggregate Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(1), pages 180-194.
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:uwp:landec:v:79:y:2003:i:1:p:74-85. 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: ()

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.