Christopher M Wade, Justin S Baker, Greg Latta, Sara B Ohrel
{"title":"利用美国林业部门结构优化模型评估聚合偏差的潜在来源。","authors":"Christopher M Wade, Justin S Baker, Greg Latta, Sara B Ohrel","doi":"10.1561/112.00000503","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Structural economic optimization models of the forestry and land use sectors can be used to develop baseline projections of future forest carbon stocks and annual fluxes, which inform policy dialog and investment in programs that maintain or enhance forest carbon stocks. Such analyses vary in terms of the degree of spatial, temporal, and activity-level aggregation used to represent forest resources, land cover, and markets. While the statistical and econometric modeling communities widely discuss the effects of aggregation bias and have developed correction techniques, there is limited prior research investigating how aggregation bias may affect structural optimization models. This paper explores potential aggregation bias using the Land Use and Resource Allocation model (LURA), a detailed spatial allocation partial equilibrium model of the U.S. forest sector. We ran a series of projections representing alternative aggregation approaches including averaging forest stocks at plot, county, state, and regional levels, across one-, five, or ten-year age classes, and by two or fourteen forest types. We compared the resulting projections of forest carbon stocks and harvesting activities across each aggregation scenario. This allows us to isolate the effect of aggregation on key variables of interest (e.g., GHG emissions and supply costs), while holding all other structural characteristics of the modeling framework constant. We find that age-class and forest type aggregations have the greatest impact on modeling results, with the potential to substantially impact market and greenhouse gas projections. On the other hand, spatial aggregation has a small impact on national carbon stock projections. Importantly, regional results are greatly impacted by different aggregation approaches, with projected regional cumulative carbon stocks differing by more than 25% across scenarios.</p>","PeriodicalId":54831,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forest Economics","volume":"34 3-4","pages":"337-366"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7065410/pdf/nihms-1564399.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Potential Sources of Aggregation Bias with a Structural Optimization Model of the U.S. Forest Sector.\",\"authors\":\"Christopher M Wade, Justin S Baker, Greg Latta, Sara B Ohrel\",\"doi\":\"10.1561/112.00000503\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Structural economic optimization models of the forestry and land use sectors can be used to develop baseline projections of future forest carbon stocks and annual fluxes, which inform policy dialog and investment in programs that maintain or enhance forest carbon stocks. Such analyses vary in terms of the degree of spatial, temporal, and activity-level aggregation used to represent forest resources, land cover, and markets. While the statistical and econometric modeling communities widely discuss the effects of aggregation bias and have developed correction techniques, there is limited prior research investigating how aggregation bias may affect structural optimization models. This paper explores potential aggregation bias using the Land Use and Resource Allocation model (LURA), a detailed spatial allocation partial equilibrium model of the U.S. forest sector. We ran a series of projections representing alternative aggregation approaches including averaging forest stocks at plot, county, state, and regional levels, across one-, five, or ten-year age classes, and by two or fourteen forest types. We compared the resulting projections of forest carbon stocks and harvesting activities across each aggregation scenario. This allows us to isolate the effect of aggregation on key variables of interest (e.g., GHG emissions and supply costs), while holding all other structural characteristics of the modeling framework constant. We find that age-class and forest type aggregations have the greatest impact on modeling results, with the potential to substantially impact market and greenhouse gas projections. On the other hand, spatial aggregation has a small impact on national carbon stock projections. Importantly, regional results are greatly impacted by different aggregation approaches, with projected regional cumulative carbon stocks differing by more than 25% across scenarios.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54831,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Forest Economics\",\"volume\":\"34 3-4\",\"pages\":\"337-366\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7065410/pdf/nihms-1564399.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Forest Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1561/112.00000503\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Forest Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1561/112.00000503","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluating Potential Sources of Aggregation Bias with a Structural Optimization Model of the U.S. Forest Sector.
Structural economic optimization models of the forestry and land use sectors can be used to develop baseline projections of future forest carbon stocks and annual fluxes, which inform policy dialog and investment in programs that maintain or enhance forest carbon stocks. Such analyses vary in terms of the degree of spatial, temporal, and activity-level aggregation used to represent forest resources, land cover, and markets. While the statistical and econometric modeling communities widely discuss the effects of aggregation bias and have developed correction techniques, there is limited prior research investigating how aggregation bias may affect structural optimization models. This paper explores potential aggregation bias using the Land Use and Resource Allocation model (LURA), a detailed spatial allocation partial equilibrium model of the U.S. forest sector. We ran a series of projections representing alternative aggregation approaches including averaging forest stocks at plot, county, state, and regional levels, across one-, five, or ten-year age classes, and by two or fourteen forest types. We compared the resulting projections of forest carbon stocks and harvesting activities across each aggregation scenario. This allows us to isolate the effect of aggregation on key variables of interest (e.g., GHG emissions and supply costs), while holding all other structural characteristics of the modeling framework constant. We find that age-class and forest type aggregations have the greatest impact on modeling results, with the potential to substantially impact market and greenhouse gas projections. On the other hand, spatial aggregation has a small impact on national carbon stock projections. Importantly, regional results are greatly impacted by different aggregation approaches, with projected regional cumulative carbon stocks differing by more than 25% across scenarios.
期刊介绍:
The journal covers all aspects of forest economics, and publishes scientific papers in subject areas such as the following:
forest management problems: economics of silviculture, forest regulation and operational activities, managerial economics;
forest industry analysis: economics of processing, industrial organization problems, demand and supply analysis, technological change, international trade of forest products;
multiple use of forests: valuation of non-market priced goods and services, cost-benefit analysis of environment and timber production, external effects of forestry and forest industry;
forest policy analysis: market and intervention failures, regulation of forest management, ownership, taxation;
land use and economic development: deforestation and land use problem, national resource accounting, contribution to national and regional income and employment.
forestry and climate change: using forestry to mitigate climate change, economic analysis of bioenergy, adaption of forestry to climate change.