IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/uwp/landec/v79y2003i1p74-85.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew J. Plantinga
  • JunJie Wu

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew J. Plantinga & JunJie Wu, 2003. "Co-Benefits from Carbon Sequestration in Forests: Evaluating Reductions in Agricultural Externalities from an Afforestation Policy in Wisconsin," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(1), pages 74-85.
    • Handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:79:y:2003:i:1:p:74-85
    as

    Download full text from publisher

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

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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 920-937, July.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    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. 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.
    8. 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, January.
    9. 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.
    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.
    11. 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.
    12. Miller, Douglas & Plantinga, Andrew J., 1999. "Modeling Land Use Decisions with Aggregate Data," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1487, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • 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: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: (). General contact details of provider: http://le.uwpress.org/ .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.