IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/uwp/landec/v80y2004i1p109-124.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating Leakage from Forest Carbon Sequestration Programs

Author

Listed:
  • Brian C. Murray
  • Bruce A. McCarl
  • Heng-Chi Lee

Abstract

L eakage from forest carbon seques- tion has been widely acclaimed as an optration— the amount of a program’s direct carbon tion for mitigating greenhouse gas emisbenefits undermined by carbon releases else- sions (GHGE). Land use change and where—depends critically on demanders’ability to forestry (LUCF) are seen asmitigation opsubstitute non-reserved timber for timber targeted tions with potentially low oppor tunity by the program. A nalytic, econometric, and sectorcosts and high level optimization models are combined to estimate ancillary benefits (see IPCC leakage from different forest carbon sequestration 2000; Bush 2002) . activities. Empirical estimates for the United States As policy proposals to mitigate climate show leakage ranges from minimal (, 10%) to change have evolved from the 1992 United enormous (. 90%), depending on the activity and Nations Earth Summit in Rio de Janiero, region. These results suggest that leakage effects it has become clear that, at least in the should not be ignored in accounting for the net short run, restrictions on the emission of level of greenhouse gas offsets from land use greenhouse gases (GHGs) would be conchange and forestry mitigation activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian C. Murray & Bruce A. McCarl & Heng-Chi Lee, 2004. "Estimating Leakage from Forest Carbon Sequestration Programs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 80(1), pages 109-124.
  • Handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:80:y:2004:i:1:p:109-124
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://le.uwpress.org/content/vol80/issue1/109
    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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • Q32 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Exhaustible Resources and Economic Development

    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:80:y:2004:i:1:p:109-124. 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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.