 Under the risk of destructive event, are there differences between timber income based and carbon sequestration based silviculture?Forest Policy and Economics, 2020, vol. 120, issue C Abstract: We consider the management of a mono-specific even-aged forest at the stand level. Optimal silviculture based on timber income and sequestered carbon income in an no risk case and a risky case are compared. In this study, using calculus of variations we discuss the validity of using a risk adjusted discount rate (a rate of natural risk added to the discount rate) or using a carbon adjusted discount rate (a rate of natural risk subtracted to the carbon discount rate) without risk to mimic the natural risk case in term of optimal thinnings. Except for very high risk rate values in the risky case, the optimal trajectory for carbon sequestration is very different from that obtained for the timber criterion. We show that without risk or with risk case but moderate risk rate, the optimal cutting age for sequestered carbon will be the senescence age. For higher risk rate the optimal cutting age for sequestered carbon may be more comparable to optimal timber cutting age. Keywords: Optimization; Calculus of variations; Optimal control; Faustmann value; Tipping age; Carbon sequestration (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:forpol:v:120:y:2020:i:c:s1389934120300137 DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102269 Access Statistics for this article Forest Policy and Economics is currently edited by M. Krott More articles in Forest Policy and Economics from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.