Assessing the economic tradeoffs of various forest management activities to enhance carbon sequestration efforts in Pennsylvania and Maryland

Résumé fourni par la source

Forests play a vital role in mitigating climate change by sequestering and storing atmospheric carbon dioxide. State forestry agencies in the United States can enhance these benefits through sustainable management practices on public lands and by supporting private landowners with technical assistance and financial incentives. Furthermore, understanding the implications of shifting incentives for climate-smart forest management is essential to improving the efficacy of landowner support. This study evaluates the financial tradeoffs of various forest management strategies compared to a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario using modeled outputs from the Carbon Budget Model of the Canadian Forest Sector (CBM-CFS3) and two associated harvest wood product models in Maryland and Pennsylvania. Results show that scenarios like afforestation, restocking, and silvopasture provide higher net present value (NPV) when carbon revenue is included, despite initially lower returns compared to BAU. Scenarios such as controlled deer browsing and silvopasture outperformed BAU in NPV when accounting for carbon sequestration. Altering rotation lengths showed higher economic tradeoffs compared to other management strategies. Active forest management with diversified strategies, such as a portfolio approach incorporating multiple management strategies simultaneously, produced the best balance between economic and ecological goals. These strategies enhance carbon sequestration, improve NPV, and support climate change mitigation more effectively than BAU or single management approaches. Actively managed forests with diverse prescriptions produce superior benefits for both climate mitigation and forest productivity. The findings underscore the importance of active management and collaboration among policymakers, foresters, and stakeholders to optimize forest carbon benefits while maintaining ecological and economic balance.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.