Permanence of agricultural afforestation for carbon sequestration under stylized carbon markets in the U.S.

Forest Policy and Economics

Volumn 41, Issue , 2014, Pages 12-21

  Haim, David ^a   White, Eric M ^a   Alig, Ralph J ^b  

^a OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b U S DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE   (United States)

Author keywords

Agricultural afforestation; Carbon markets; Economics; Permanence

Indexed keywords

EID: 84894250667     PISSN: 13899341     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.12.008     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Adams D.M., Alig R.J., McCarl B., Callaway J.M., Winnet S. The Forest and Agriculture Sector Optimization Model (FASOM): model structure and policy applications. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-495 1996, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR.
2. Alig R.J., Mills T.J., Shackelford R.J. Most Soil Bank plantings in the south have been retained; some need follow-up treatment. South. J. Appl. For. 1980, 4(1):60-64.
3. Alig R.J., Latta G., Adams D., McCarl B. Mitigating greenhouse gases: the importance of land base interactions between forests, agriculture, and residential development in the face of changes in bioenergy and carbon prices. Forest Policy Econ. 2010, 12(1):67-75.
4. Alig R.J., Plantinga A.J., Haim D., Todd M. Area changes in U.S. forests and other major land uses, 1982 to 2002, with projections to 2062. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-815 2010, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, (98 pp.).
5. Beach R.H., Adams D.A., Alig R., Baker J., Latta G.S., McCarl B.A., Murray B.C., Rose S.K., White E. Model documentation for the Forest and Agriculture Sector Optimization Model with Greenhouse Gases (FASOMGHG) (188 pp.). http://www.cof.orst.edu/cof/fr/research/tamm/FASOMGHG_Model_Documentation_Aug2010.pdf.
6. Birdsey R.A. Carbon storage for major forest types and regions in the conterminous United States. Forest Management Opportunities for Mitigating Carbon Emissions 1996, vol. 2. R.N. Sampson, D. Hair (Eds.).
7. Birdsey R., Alig R., Adams D. Mitigation activities in the forest sector to reduce emissions and enhance sinks of greenhouse gases. The impact of climate change on America's forests: a technical document supporting the 2000 USDA Forest Service RPA Assessment. Gen. Tech. Report RMRS-GTR-59. U.S 2000, 112-131. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Fort Collins, CO. L.A. Joyce, R. Birdsey (Eds.).
8. Climate Action Reserve (CAR) Forest project protocol version 3.3 Available from. http://www.climateactionreserve.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Forest_Project_Protocol_Version_3.31.pdf.
9. Enkvist P.-A., Naucler T., Rosander J. A cost curve for greenhouse gas reduction Available:, (June 3, 2010). http://www.epa.gov/oar/caaac/coaltech/2007_05_mckinsey.pdf.
10. EPA U.S. greenhouse gas inventory report. Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990-2010 2013.
11. Gorte R.W., Ramseur J.L. Forest carbon markets: potential and drawbacks. Report for congress, Congressional Research Service report #7-5700 2008.
12. Johnson R., Ramseur J.L., Gorte R.W. Estimates of carbon mitigation potential from agriculture and forestry activities. Congressional Research Service Report for Congress 2009, (Available: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40236.pdf. (June 3, 2010)).
13. Kim M.K., McCarl B.A., Murray B.C. Permanence discounting for land-based carbon sequestration. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 64:763-769.
14. Latta G., Adams D.M., Alig R.J., White E. Simulated effects of mandatory versus voluntary participation in private forest carbon offset markets in the United States. J. For. Econ. 2011, 17:127-141.
15. Lee H.-C.B., McCarl U.A., Schneider C.C.Chen Leakage and comparative advantage implications of agriculture participation in greenhouse gas emission mitigation. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2007, 12(4):471-494.
16. Lewandrowski J.M.Peters, Jones C., House R., Sperow M., Eve M., Paustian K. Economics of sequestering carbon in the U.S. Agricultural sector. Tech. Bull. 1909 2004, Economic Research Service, Washington, D.C.
17. McCarl B.A., Schneider U.A. The cost of greenhouse gas mitigation in US agriculture and forestry. Science 2001, 294:2481-2482.
18. Murray B.C., McCarl B.A., Lee H.-C. Estimating leakage from forest carbon sequestration programs. Land Econ. 2004, 80(1):109-124.
19. Nepal P., Ince P.J., Skog K.E., Chang S.J. Projected US timber and primary forest project market impacts of climate change mitigation through timber set-asides. Can. J. For. Res. 2013, 43:245-255.
20. Reilly M.J., Asadoorian M.O. Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions from land use: creating incentives within greenhouse gas emissions trading systems. Clim. Chang. 2007, 80:173-197.
21. Schneider U.A. Agricultural Sector Analysis on Greenhouse Gas Emission Mitigation in the U.S 2000, PhD dissertation, College Station, TX: Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas A&M University, (December).
22. Sohngen B., Brown S. Extending timber rotations: carbon and cost implications. Clim. Pol. 2008, 8(5):435-451.
23. Yemshanov D., Biggs J., McKenney D.W., Lempriere T. Effects of permanence requirements on afforestation choices for carbon sequestration for Ontario, Canada. Forest Policy Econ. 2012, 14:6-18.