Research on Forest Utility for Maximizing Forest Value

Authors

  • Zeya Wen

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54691/bcpbm.v19i.841

Keywords:

Biomass, Carbon sequestration, Value assessment, Manage decisions

Abstract

In order to measure forest carbon sequestration and make decisions on forest management, three models were established in this paper. Firstly, in Model I, we use ARIMA model and CBEF model to obtain the total biomass stored in the forest area and annual carbon sequestration of different dominant species in the same year. Then in Model II, the study classifies the value of forest ecosystem into carbon sink value, economic value and ecological benefit value. Then determine the weight of different forest values to obtain total forest value. Ultimately, In Model III, this paper defines the forms of economic benefits after tree harvesting based on economic principles, Tietenberg model and empirical equation, so as to obtain the optimal harvesting intensity and cycle of different tree species. So the optimal forest management plan can be determined. In this paper, the optimal management plan for forest value maximization in Palau within a certain period is given based on the above multidimensional measurement of forest value. Sensitivity analysis was also carried out, which shows there was little difference in the total value of forests calculated by the model when average log prices remained stable.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Xu B, Guo Z D, Piao S L, et al. Biomass carbon stocks in China’s forests between 2000 and 2050: A prediction based on forest biomass-age relationships[J]. Science China Life Sciences, 2010, 53(7): 776-783.

Le Toan T, Quegan S, Davidson M W J, et al. The BIOMASS mission: Mapping global forest biomass to better understand the terrestrial carbon cycle[J]. Remote sensing of environment, 2011, 115(11): 2850-2860.

Houghton R A. Aboveground forest biomass and the global carbon balance[J]. Global change biology, 2005, 11(6): 945-958.

Lal R. Forest soils and carbon sequestration[J]. Forest ecology and management, 2005, 220(1-3): 242-258.

Richards K R, Stokes C. A review of forest carbon sequestration cost studies: a dozen years of research[J]. Climatic change, 2004, 63(1): 1-48.

Boumans R, Costanza R, Farley J, et al. Modeling the dynamics of the integrated earth system and the value of global ecosystem services using the GUMBO model[J]. Ecological economics, 2002, 41(3): 529-560.

Pearce D W. The economic value of forest ecosystems[J]. Ecosystem health, 2001, 7(4): 284-296.

Fang J, Wang G G, Liu G H, et al. Forest biomass of China: an estimate based on the biomass–volume relationship[J]. Ecological Applications, 1998, 8(4): 1084-1091.

Siry J P, Cubbage F W, Ahmed M R. Sustainable forest management: global trends and opportunities[J]. Forest policy and Economics, 2005, 7(4): 551-561.

Jiang Xin, WANG Xiujuan. Optimal cutting decision model of forest – a new framework of forestry economic policy analysis [J]. Scientia silvae sinicae,2013,49(09):178-185.Buongiorno J, Gilless J K. Forest management and economics[J]. 1987.

Brown G, Reed P. Validation of a forest values typology for use in national forest planning[J]. Forest science, 2000, 46(2): 240-247.

Krieger D J. Economic value of forest ecosystem services: a review[J]. 2001.

Hartman R. The harvesting decision when a standing forest has value[M]//Economics of Forestry. Routledge, 2018: 295-302.

McPherson E G, Nowak D, Heisler G, et al. Quantifying urban forest structure, function, and value: the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project[J]. Urban ecosystems, 1997, 1(1): 49-61.

Faustmann M. Calculation of the value which forest land and immature stands possess for forestry[M]//Economics of Forestry. Routledge, 2018: 1-40.

Downloads

Published

2022-05-31

How to Cite

Wen, Z. (2022). Research on Forest Utility for Maximizing Forest Value. BCP Business & Management, 19, 491-499. https://doi.org/10.54691/bcpbm.v19i.841