1 / 43

450 likes | 1.01k Views

Forest Economics © Peter Berck 2003 Type of Site, j Many “birthdays” First is –M. h j (t,s) t is calendar time s is birthday of stand h is acres harvested D j (t-s) is volume per acre Warning: See article to get > and >= correct. Simple Forest Planning Problem cont… v(t) is cut at t

Download Presentation
## Forest Economics

**An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation**
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.
Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only.
Download presentation by click this link.
While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

**Forest Economics**© Peter Berck 2003**Type of Site, j**Many “birthdays” First is –M. hj(t,s) t is calendar time s is birthday of stand h is acres harvested Dj(t-s) is volume per acre Warning: See article to get > and >= correct. Simple Forest Planning**Problem cont…**• v(t) is cut at t • v=js>-M Dj(t-s) hj(t, s) • Max present value • of P times V • s.t. biology • v(t+1) v(t) non declining flow • t-s > CMAI or h = 0**Initial Acres = Cut over all time**Aj(s) = t>s hj(t,s) Cut acres regrow and are recut s hj(t,s) = a hj(a,t) Cut at t from all birthdays (s<=t) is what is reborn at t and therefore cut in times a>t. Biology This is Johnson and Scheurman, Model II.**W**• W is what is left standing • w(time, birthday) • wj(z,s) = Aj(s) - t<Z hj(t,s) • For stands born before time zero s< 0 • wj(z,s) =t<s hj(s,t) - a<z hj(a,s) • For stands born s>0. first sum is total acreage in stand regenerated in time s • Second sum is amount cut in times prior to z from stands regenerated at time s.**Expanded Objective Function**• Let E(s,t) be value of wildlife, etc • Y(t) = js>-M Dj(t-s) hj(t, s)P(t) + • js>-M wj(s,t) Ej(s,t) • Max present value of Y(t).**Types of sites, j**different species site classes critical locations near streams visual buffers More Constraints Don’t cut type j Keep N% of forest at age, t-s, > 100 constraint on w More treatments commercial thin pre-commercial thin More meaning to the model**Biology**• Could use stand table. • McArdle Bruce Meyer tables for doug fir • Could use stand simulator and then table the results • Must handle changes in stand discretely—possibly as stand with new growth**Stochastic**• Can be turned into stochastic program. Dixon and Howitt do this by taking linear quadratic approximations and solving them. (AJAE) • Fire, insects, make stochastic advisable if planning is objective.**Dual**• One can show that the dual to the simple problem is: • Max( value of cutting, value of leaving alone) • Cutting is just Dj(t-s) P + shadow of bare land at t. • Leaving stand is shadow of bare land one period older next period.**Valuing stock**• Easy: Just add terms to the objective function of the form • W S • Where W is the stock and S is the valuebv • Dual now includes added term in S (big S if held and little S if not, one presumes) • This formulation takes care of carbon sequestration.**Turning JS into a estimating model**• Want to know if private and public forest were managed differently and if so what was “optimal” or what the shadow losses were of public management. • Need to estimate future prices and appropriate interest rate.**How do we get P**• Model of previous section has value function J(P1,…,Pn, r) where P are the prices in the n periods and r is the interest rate. • Let CS(Pi) be consumer surplus of i • Consider functional Z(P,r) = J + S CS(Pi) • Function takes a minimum where supply = demand**Demand**• Demand is estimated from time series data. Price and housing starts are most important variables in demand • Forest stock identifies the demand equation.**Now– for each choice of r, using the rule that P mins Z we**can find P(r) • Given the Prices, the planning part of the model gives the cut, v. • Residual is predicted less actual cut • Min sum sq. resids by varying r • This estimates the model**Given the r and the P’s it is a simple matter to value the**losses to cmai (small) and to oldgrowth retention, large.**Redwood National Park**• Oldgrowth Redwood stands have zero net growth. • Can use exhaustible resource framework**Hotelling’s Model: 3 Equations**• 1. Capital Market Equilibrium • 2. Feasibility • 3. Flow Market Equilibria.**Price Goes Up a Rate of Interest**• Hotelling’s Rule • Rate of change in price is capital gain • No uncertainty • Must equal sure rate r • dp/dt = r p where t is time • (1 ) p = p0ert, where p0 is initial price**Use no more than there is**• Second, the sum of the stumpage cut, q(t), over time equals the original stock of stumpage, • (2 )**Flow Market Equilibrium**• c is the cost of converting resource stock to resource flow: • example: standing trees into lumber (or other semi-processed product). • Thus, s = p + c is the price of lumber • Let h be variables, such as housing starts, that shift the demand for lumber**More on the Flow**• Q*(s, h) demand for (flow) lumber. • Assume that it takes x units of stumpage to make one unit of lumber. Then, the derived demand for stumpage is Q(p + c, h) = xQ*(s, h). • Q(p+c, h) is (stock) stumpage demand • (3) q(t) = Q(p(t) + c, h).**Solving the Model**• (1 )p = p0ert, where p0 is initial price • (3) q(t) = Q(p(t) + c, h). • SO • q(t) = Q(p0ert+ c, h).**What to estimate**• P as function of stock, housing starts, interest rate etc • Demand function • Was able to show that the cross equation constraints in the two equations were not violated when one chooses a flexible enough form for P(x,h,r…)**Taking of the Redwood Park**• In 1968 and again in 1978 the US took a total of 3.1 billion bd ft of standing timber from private companies to form the Redwood National Park • The amount by which the price of Redwood went up as a result of the take is called enhancement**Enhancement**• Amount by which the price goes up when the private timber is taken into the park • Enhance = p(xafter take) – p(xbefore take)**Enhancement: Lowering X(0)**p price path is result of new X(0) Arrow shows size of enhancement P0 ert p0 p0 q t q 450 line**Folded Diagram Model**• p(x(t)) = p0ert • price as function of stock is same as price as function of time • price in year t + 1 is just p(x(t) – q(t)) which is also p0er(t+1) • p(x(t) – ) = p0er(t+n) • price after n years of cutting equals the price at • time t (p0ert) times the interest factor for n years (er n). • Choose n so that the Park taking equals**Enhancement: Years Method**p X(0) is again red area. Arrow shows number of years need to wait to find equivalent P0 ert p0 p0 q t q 450 line**Value of Enhancement**• The 1978 Park taking was 1.4 billion board feet, which is the equivalent of 2.26 years of cutting. • price 1978, was $311 per MBF. • real interest rate—7 percent • 2.26 years at 7 percent real per year or 17 percent of price**Conclusion**• Gov’t paid $689 million for second take • enhancement was $583 million • estimated by reduced form method • Therefore the US paid nearly twice for the park**Forest Area/Deforestation**• US: Virgin forest to today: less forest • However NE and S. both regrew • Large parts of rural US are going back to forest • General trend is for less forest • Foster and Rosenzweig look at India**Naïve**• Many LDC’s have insufficient land ownership to protect forests • Marcos denuded the Phillipines for profit • Nepal has problems with marginal ag taking over forest regions • Anna’s work on Indonesia was done because of deforestation**India**• Gross forest statistics like US • Area goes down • Then up • Why? • Market stories require property rights—FR implicitly assume such. • Demand for forest products goes up, forests should go up. • Long run, true • Short run could go other way. Not so obvious**FR**• Interest is the in the matched dataset of sattelite imagery (historical forest cover) to village surveys. • Find that increased population or expenditure on forest products leads to more forest land. • Wages, ag land prices insignificant • New England can be told with wages or time to regenerate • Need relative ag land/ forest land price to do this in the normal way • Also need the product price for forest, don’t have • plausible that more income = more forest**Carbon**• Carbon sinks include soil and trees • From Sohngen and Mendelson • 10% more carbon could be sequestered in forests • Either more land • Or more intensive management • Unclear how one would keep it tied up in soil or trees • $1-150 per ton are estimates for sequestration**Optimal**• To decide what to do need to know the value of carbon sequestration by time period. • S-M model • Damage function of carbon stock • dStock/dt = emissions – abatement • Reducing emissions and abatement are costly • Minimize present value of costs**soln**• There is a shadow price of carbon, the marginal value of reducing the stock by one unit. Marginal costs = that • Problem: forestry stores the carbon for a while. Uses rental rate for carbon • Interest on value less • Price increase • Worth investigating==might not be right**Empirical**• Melds forest and climate model • Gets price for emissions abatement • Finds how sequestration changes land and forest prices • Finds equilibrium with higher prices for forest land (bid up because of sequestration) • Sequestration makes sense, but is less profitable than with no price rise**Other subjects**• Employment • Trade (and the Lumber Wars)

More Related