4.6 Article

Adapting to frequent fires: Optimal forest management revisited

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2021.102570

关键词

Fire risk; Optimal rotation; Optimal thinning; Faustmann model; Climate change

资金

  1. Fundac ao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia [UID/ECO/00124/2019, UIDB/00124/2020]
  2. POR Lisboa
  3. POR Norte (Social Sciences DataLab) [PINFRA/22209/2016]
  4. FCT under the Scientific Employment Stimulus [CEECIND/02230/2017]
  5. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia (Social Sciences DataLab) [PINFRA/22209/2016]
  6. FCT [PTDC/EGE-ECO/30523/2017]
  7. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [PTDC/EGE-ECO/30523/2017] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study highlights the importance of fire-resilient forestry practices as wildfires escalate in many regions, and how forest owners need to make optimal choices regarding rotation age, volume, and timing of partial harvesting in the presence of fire risk. The research findings suggest that more frequent fires do not necessarily lead to shorter rotation ages, but indicate the need for beginning commercial thinning sooner.
As the frequency and severity of wildfires escalates in many regions, the study of fire-resilient forestry practices becomes crucial. While forest owners may employ several silvicultural practices to mitigate fire damage, the analytical study of optimal forest management has been reduced to the effects of fire on optimal rotation only. The fundamental result of this literature date back to the early 1980s and has remained virtually uncontested since then. This paper develops an infinite rotation cycle forest model in which landowners optimally choose rotation age, volume, and timing of partial harvesting in the presence of fire risk. We show that this setting fundamentally changes earlier results. In particular, more frequent fires imply beginning commercial thinning sooner but not necessarily shortening the rotation age. Two numerical applications highlight the empirical relevance of our findings.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据