The forest harvesting problem: have we reached the limit of our understanding?

Amacher, Gregory S.

doi:10.4337/9780857937568.00015

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since then, numerous studies have applied the Hartmann extension. However, despite this success, a recent review by Amacher (2015) comes to the conclusion that albeit the economic modeling of amenities as a function of stand age may be justified as a first hypothesis, it remains very basic. The uniformity of the large number of models presented after Hartmann (1976) is also found restrictive.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Economics of mixed-species forestry with ecosystem services

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Faustmann–Hartman setup is widely established for specifying the economics of forest values besides timber, but it is criticized as restrictive for capturing diversity values. We show that extending the model to cover diversity attributes, i.e., mixed species and internal heterogeneity within species, is not enough to overcome these restrictions. Additionally, it is necessary to extend forest harvesting regimes to cover thinning, continuous cover forestry, and the management of commercially useless trees. Restrictions in the Faustmann–Hartman setup are first shown analytically with optimized thinning but without tree size structures. The empirical significance of these findings is shown by a model that includes four tree species, tree size structures, an extended set of forest management activities, a detailed description of harvesting costs, and a measure for stand diversity as a key factor behind ecosystem services. We show how an optimal harvesting regime, net revenues, wood output, and stand diversity depend on model flexibility, economic parameters, and the valuation of ecosystem services. In a setup allowing flexible management regimes, the costs of reaching a specified level of ecosystem services are negligible compared with those of the Faustmann–Hartman specification.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The uniformity of the large number of models presented after Hartmann (1976) is also found restrictive. According to Amacher (2015), forest economics has so far been unable to merge conservation biology, which identifies links between key habitats and species diversity attributes in economic optimization models of forest resources.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economics of mixed-species forestry with ecosystem services

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mathematically this selective strategy can be represented by a set of state-decision pairs, {(s t , d t )}, in which s t and d t represented pre-harvest stock and harvest, respectively, and d t <s t . For simplicity, it was further assumed constant price and stationary amenity function for any t. The reward function associated with each pair was thus R sd = h×d t + A(s t -d t ), where h referred to the stumpage price, A, the amenity value function (see [7]for a discussion on the shape of A), and s t -d t , the post-harvest forest state. The objective was to maximize the discounted sum of timber and amenity values over an infinite planning horizon (hereinafter Forest Value (FV)).For one that did not recognize amenity values, the planning problem was equivalent to maximizing the NPV of harvests , a special case of Faustmann's model [27].…”

Section: Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Loosely speaking, the stumpage market was competitive and landowners were price takers of stumpage prices [18]. The amenities may solely be private goods to the landowner or provide positive externalities to the public [7], but their values as critical components of timberland valuation were captured in the competitive real estate market. The hedonic pricing model took the general form as follows:…”

Section: Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There exists, to date, little consensus of which paradigm is more proper to describe landowners' harvesting behavior, but it is clear,to determine such values often presents major challenges, especially if the amenities have no consumptive uses [6]. Thus amenities values in optimal planning models are often assumed asconstant or varying functions with respect to stand age or some other attributes [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Valuing environmental amenities through inverse optimization: Theory and case study

Zhou

2017

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amenity values of private forests are implicit but play a critical role in decision and policy making. This study presents an innovative valuation approach integrating techniques of operations research and economic theory of pricing environmental goods. A forest planning problem was inversed through altering its reward function of timber values so that the observed harvesting behavior became optimal. The discrepancy between the original and new rewards uncovered amenities values which were linked to forest attributes via hedonic models. This method was applied to a case study of the U.S. southern pine region. Depending on forest conditions, total economic values of amenities varied from zero to just under one thousand dollar per ha. At a discount rate of 3%, a typically managed forest generatedon average $243ha-1 of amenities values per annum, more than twice of harvested timber values. Structural diversity and density of large pine trees were the key determinantsto preserving forests for environmental amenities.

show abstract

A new agent-based model provides insight into deep uncertainty faced in simulated forest management

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ContextExploratory modeling in forestry uses a variety of approaches to study forest management questions.One key assumption that every approach makes is about the degree of deep uncertainty-the lack of knowledge required for making an informed decision-that future forest managers will face. This assumption can strongly in uence simulation results and the conclusions drawn from them, but is rarely studied. ObjectivesOur objective was to measure the degree of deep uncertainty within a forest management simulation to compare alternative modeling approaches and improve understanding of when a speci c approach should be applied. MethodsWe rst developed a method for measuring the degree of deep uncertainty assumed by approaches to modeling forest management. Next, we developed a new extension to the LANDIS-II model, the SOSIEL Harvest Extension, which simulates alternative approaches to modeling forest management. Finally, we applied the new method and extension to comparing three alternative approaches to modeling forest management in Michigan. ResultsThe degrees of deep uncertainty varied substantially among the three modeling approaches. There is also an overall negative relationship between the degree of deep uncertainty an approach assumes a forest manager will face and the level of exibility the approach assumes a manager will have in responding to forest change. ConclusionsQuantifying the deep uncertainty inherent in simulated forest management and comparing it across models provides an opportunity to better understand its sources and investigate differences in the assumptions made by alternative modeling approaches.

show abstract

The forest harvesting problem: have we reached the limit of our understanding?

Cited by 6 publications

References 81 publications

Economics of mixed-species forestry with ecosystem services

Economics of mixed-species forestry with ecosystem services

Valuing environmental amenities through inverse optimization: Theory and case study

A new agent-based model provides insight into deep uncertainty faced in simulated forest management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About