Ebissa Gizaw, Fetene Aramde, Desta Hayal
Environmental Planning Ph.D. Program, EiABC, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Environmental Planning Competence Center, EiABC, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Heliyon. 2023 Apr 1;9(4):e15151. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15151. eCollection 2023 Apr.
Community-based organizations (CBOs) and individuals primarily engaged in forest management dedicated to carbon credit run both at national and regional levels. After a span of time elapsed in the same, CBOs and individuals aspired to shift the carbon-dedicated forest either into log or timber production based on an informed decision. However, there is no study done so which of these projects is financially more useful to them to make an informed decision. The objective of the study is, therefore, to make comparative analyses of plantation forests for carbon credit, round log and timber. The result has revealed that plantation forest managed for timber production is most attractive and rewarding in year 10 and year 15 both with and without discounting at 3%. Plantation forest managed for timber production enables the creation of a fixed asset than both carbon credit and log production. Plantation forests managed for the carbon credit, log production and timber production have externalities both positive and negative which must be considered while calculating the costs and benefits accrued thereof. There are existing and emerging risks associated with the carbon credit project which shifts from natural (forest) to technological abatement of climate change. The study is critical to understanding the benefits of future plantation forest investment. We, thus, conclude forest managed for timber production is financially more useful for CBOs and individuals than round log and carbon credit. We recommend CBOs and individuals to have adequate information on benefits and risks associated with plantation forests managed for carbon credit, round log and timber production before engaging in the investment.
社区组织(CBOs)和主要从事致力于碳信用额的森林管理的个人在国家和地区层面开展业务。在经历了一段时间后,CBOs和个人希望根据明智的决策,将专门用于碳的森林转变为原木或木材生产。然而,目前尚无研究表明这些项目中哪一个在经济上对他们更有利,以便做出明智的决策。因此,该研究的目的是对用于碳信用额的人工林、圆木和木材进行比较分析。结果表明,无论是在第10年还是第15年,无论是按3%折现还是不折现,用于木材生产的人工林都是最具吸引力和回报最高的。用于木材生产的人工林比碳信用额和原木生产更能创造固定资产。用于碳信用额、原木生产和木材生产的人工林都有正负外部性,在计算由此产生的成本和收益时必须予以考虑。从自然(森林)转向气候变化技术减排的碳信用项目存在现有和新出现的风险。该研究对于理解未来人工林投资的益处至关重要。因此,我们得出结论,对于CBOs和个人来说,用于木材生产的森林在经济上比圆木和碳信用额更有用。我们建议CBOs和个人在进行投资之前,充分了解与用于碳信用额、圆木和木材生产的人工林相关的收益和风险。