林业科学 ›› 2022, Vol. 58 ›› Issue (5): 18-30.doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20220503
董灵波1,2,蔺雪莹1,张一帆3,刘兆刚1,2,*
收稿日期:
2021-05-16
出版日期:
2022-05-25
发布日期:
2022-08-19
通讯作者:
刘兆刚
基金资助:
Lingbo Dong1,2,Xueying Lin1,Yifan Zhang3,Zhaogang Liu1,2,*
Received:
2021-05-16
Online:
2022-05-25
Published:
2022-08-19
Contact:
Zhaogang Liu
摘要:
目的: 针对当前人工林经营重木材收益、轻碳汇效益的问题, 探究兼顾碳汇和木材生产的人工林最优轮伐期, 为人工林多目标经营提供理论依据。方法: 以黑龙江省东北林业大学帽儿山实验林场35块长白落叶松人工林样地为研究对象, 以Faustmann-Hartman模型为基础, 综合考虑乔木层生物量碳库、生物质能源碳库、采伐剩余物碳库和木材产品碳库, 构建长白落叶松人工林碳汇木材复合经营的最优轮伐期确定模型; 设计4种模拟情景, 情景1考虑木材收益、生物质能源收益和经营成本, 情景2—4分别在情景1的基础上依次加入乔木层生物量碳库、采伐剩余物碳库和木材产品碳库, 对各模拟情景分别量化不同碳价格、贴现率、枝叶生物质能源比例等因素对长白落叶松人工林最优轮伐期、木材产量、碳汇量以及林地期望值的影响。结果: 基准情景下(碳价格100元·t-1, 贴现率5%, 枝叶生物质能源比例20%), 林地期望值整体随林分年龄增加呈先增加后减小的趋势, 可采用二次多项式进行模拟(Ra2 > 0.60)。情景1—4的最优轮伐期均为35年, 其所对应的林地期望值分别为50 288、53 638、53 263和53 071元·hm-2, 情景2—4的林地期望值分别较情景1增加约6.66%、5.92%和5.53%。对于情景2—4来说, 能够使长白落叶松人工林最优轮伐期延长1年的最低碳价格分别为1 500、1 000和1 000元·t-1 C, 其对应的林地期望值可分别达到100 667元·hm-2、80 171元·hm-2和78 266元·hm-2, 较情景1显著增加约87.7%、50.5%和47.5%; 当贴现率从5%增至9%时, 最优轮伐期提前约4年, 林地期望值减少约49 200元·hm-2; 对同一贴现率而言, 不同模拟情景下最优轮伐期和林地期望值的差异均不显著。结论: 在当前木材和碳交易市场约束下, 长白落叶松人工林经营仍以木材收益占绝对主导地位, 碳库种类增加对最优轮伐期改变不明显, 但显著影响林地期望值。碳价格和贴现率显著影响长白落叶松人工林的最优轮伐期和林地期望值, 其中能够使长白落叶松人工林最优轮伐期延长1年的最低碳价格至少应为1 000元·t-1。
中图分类号:
董灵波,蔺雪莹,张一帆,刘兆刚. 兼顾碳汇和木材生产的长白落叶松人工林最优轮伐期[J]. 林业科学, 2022, 58(5): 18-30.
Lingbo Dong,Xueying Lin,Yifan Zhang,Zhaogang Liu. Optimal Rotation of Larix olgensis Plantation in Considering Carbon Sequestration and Timber Production[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2022, 58(5): 18-30.
表1
各样地基本特征①"
年龄 Age/a | 平均胸径 Mean DBH/cm | 平均树高 Mean tree height/m | 地位指数 Site class index/m | 单木蓄积 Volume/m3 | 大径材材积 Large-diameter volume/m3 | 中径材材积 Medium-diameter volume/m3 | 小径材材积 Small-diameter volume/m3 | 株数密度 Density/(tree·hm-2) |
17 | 9.66 | 10.98 | 17.11 | 146.14 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 52.51 | 3 022 |
18 | 11.94 | 11.17 | 16.60 | 189.38 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 91.03 | 2 622 |
19 | 12.70 | 13.31 | 18.92 | 248.75 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 141.25 | 2 583 |
20 | 13.77 | 14.63 | 19.95 | 214.03 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 124.48 | 1 744 |
21 | 14.67 | 15.38 | 20.17 | 241.08 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 146.75 | 1 666 |
22 | 15.46 | 15.42 | 19.49 | 225.17 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 137.66 | 1 411 |
24 | 17.42 | 15.68 | 18.52 | 277.55 | 0.00 | 57.88 | 124.24 | 1 377 |
26 | 18.97 | 16.97 | 18.86 | 328.16 | 0.00 | 120.81 | 103.26 | 1 288 |
27 | 19.98 | 16.96 | 18.32 | 347.79 | 0.00 | 128.50 | 109.83 | 1 244 |
28 | 20.27 | 18.81 | 19.78 | 395.94 | 0.00 | 197.46 | 83.90 | 1 244 |
28 | 20.26 | 18.19 | 19.13 | 365.42 | 0.00 | 181.07 | 76.94 | 1 188 |
29 | 20.72 | 18.85 | 19.32 | 413.02 | 0.00 | 206.39 | 87.70 | 1 244 |
29 | 20.76 | 18.20 | 18.65 | 389.11 | 0.00 | 193.16 | 82.08 | 1 211 |
30 | 20.83 | 19.55 | 19.55 | 428.63 | 0.00 | 215.76 | 91.68 | 1 233 |
30 | 20.83 | 19.07 | 19.07 | 418.09 | 0.00 | 209.46 | 89.00 | 1 233 |
31 | 21.35 | 19.67 | 19.21 | 455.23 | 0.00 | 229.84 | 97.66 | 1 244 |
31 | 21.29 | 19.37 | 18.92 | 445.80 | 0.00 | 224.37 | 95.34 | 1 244 |
32 | 22.51 | 20.56 | 19.64 | 528.27 | 0.00 | 292.25 | 97.91 | 1 255 |
32 | 21.94 | 21.12 | 20.17 | 513.54 | 0.00 | 263.33 | 111.89 | 1 244 |
33 | 22.94 | 21.51 | 20.11 | 658.52 | 0.00 | 374.24 | 125.38 | 1 322 |
33 | 23.44 | 20.01 | 18.70 | 543.51 | 0.00 | 300.02 | 100.51 | 1 233 |
34 | 23.77 | 20.36 | 18.64 | 572.46 | 0.00 | 317.37 | 106.33 | 1 244 |
34 | 24.64 | 20.66 | 18.92 | 619.82 | 119.26 | 275.93 | 72.49 | 1 244 |
35 | 25.27 | 20.38 | 18.30 | 611.52 | 117.57 | 272.03 | 71.47 | 1 188 |
35 | 24.79 | 22.91 | 20.57 | 657.77 | 129.12 | 298.75 | 78.49 | 1 177 |
36 | 25.82 | 24.09 | 20.34 | 829.05 | 164.80 | 381.29 | 100.17 | 1 311 |
36 | 26.12 | 22.09 | 19.46 | 776.50 | 271.89 | 254.76 | 76.73 | 1 311 |
37 | 26.83 | 23.69 | 20.49 | 822.69 | 292.50 | 274.07 | 82.54 | 1 233 |
37 | 27.48 | 22.04 | 19.06 | 777.17 | 273.01 | 255.81 | 77.04 | 1 200 |
38 | 27.31 | 22.32 | 18.97 | 691.91 | 243.54 | 228.20 | 68.73 | 1 066 |
38 | 26.63 | 22.35 | 18.99 | 737.65 | 259.22 | 242.88 | 73.15 | 1 188 |
39 | 26.18 | 20.21 | 16.88 | 676.94 | 233.10 | 218.41 | 65.78 | 1 244 |
40 | 26.52 | 20.54 | 16.88 | 546.96 | 189.09 | 177.18 | 53.36 | 966 |
43 | 23.72 | 21.32 | 16.74 | 517.59 | 0.00 | 281.22 | 94.22 | 1 255 |
50 | 29.24 | 26.08 | 18.73 | 886.76 | 206.26 | 206.26 | 67.28 | 1 033 |
表2
轮伐期内林地各种经济惩罚分类①"
折现程度 Discount level | 时间 Time | 种类 Kind | 单位价格 Price per unit/yuan | 数量 Quantity | 总价格 Total price/yuan |
不折现 Not discounted | 第一年First year | 整地用工Land preparation labor/(yuan·hm-2) | 125 | 20 | 2 500 |
第一年First year | 种植用工Planting labor/(yuan·hm-2) | 125 | 30 | 3 750 | |
第一年First year | 苗木Seedling/(yuan·seedling-1) | 0.25 | 3 333 | 833 | |
不完全折现 Incompletely discounted | 第2~4年Years 2-4 | 补植用工Replanting labor/(yuan·hm-2) | 125 | 4 | 500 |
第2~4年Years 2-4 | 补植苗木Replanting seedling/(yuan·seedling-1) | 0.25 | 100 | 25 | |
每年Every year | 管护成本Management cost/(yuan·hm-2) | 150 | 1 | 150 | |
每年Every year | 地租Land rent/(yuan·hm-2) | 300 | 1 | 300 | |
完全折现 Completely discounted | 最后一年The last year 最后一年The last year | 采运成本Harvest and transportation cost/(yuan·m-3) 机械成本Machinery cost/(yuan·hm-2) | 65 1 100 | V 1 | 65V 1 100 |
表3
碳汇模型评价指标"
不同器官模型 Model of different organs | 调整决定系数 Ra2 | 模型均方根误差 RMSE/(t·hm-2) | 平均绝对偏差 MAE/(t·hm-2) | 平均相对偏差绝对值 MRE(%) |
树干生长模型 Growth model of trunk | 0.891 | 0.133 | 0.083 | 2.99 |
树枝生长模型 Growth model of branch | 0.850 | 0.148 | 0.081 | 3.24 |
树根生长模型 Growth model of root | 0.781 | 1.471 | 0.688 | 8.97 |
树叶生长模型 Growth model of leaf | 0.932 | 0.035 | 0.024 | 0.71 |
表4
各样地林地期望值①"
年龄 Age/a | 情景1 Scenario 1 | 情景2 Scenario 2 | 情景3 Scenario 3 | 情景4 Scenario 4 | ||||||
林地期望值 LEV/(yuan·hm-2) | 林地期望值 LEV/(yuan·hm-2) | 碳汇与木材收益 比值Rct(%) | 林地期望值 LEV/(yuan·hm-2) | 碳汇与木材收益 比值Rct(%) | 林地期望值 LEV/(yuan·hm-2) | 碳汇与木材收益 比值Rct(%) | ||||
17 | -1 376 | 1 206 | 3.12 | 875 | 2.69 | 798 | 2.45 | |||
18 | 11 227 | 14 314 | 3.34 | 13 867 | 2.78 | 13 744 | 2.52 | |||
19 | 25 585 | 28 571 | 3.19 | 28 033 | 2.72 | 27 858 | 2.46 | |||
20 | 16 968 | 19 654 | 4.74 | 19 166 | 3.79 | 19 024 | 3.47 | |||
21 | 20 588 | 22 873 | 10.80 | 22 413 | 9.41 | 22 258 | 9.09 | |||
22 | 15 259 | 19 382 | 2.87 | 18 540 | 2.41 | 18 406 | 2.15 | |||
24 | 25 652 | 29 288 | 4.08 | 28 781 | 3.51 | 28 628 | 3.25 | |||
26 | 32 708 | 34 973 | 9.84 | 34 595 | 7.83 | 34 430 | 7.51 | |||
27 | 32 430 | 36 668 | 7.63 | 36 162 | 7.12 | 35 998 | 6.89 | |||
28 | 41 020 | 43 340 | 4.99 | 42 956 | 4.55 | 42 775 | 4.32 | |||
28 | 35 913 | 38 381 | 3.76 | 37 983 | 3.13 | 37 818 | 2.86 | |||
29 | 39 719 | 41 979 | 3.36 | 41 602 | 2.96 | 41 425 | 2.72 | |||
29 | 35 873 | 38 680 | 3.36 | 38 315 | 2.80 | 38 150 | 2.54 | |||
30 | 38 546 | 41 929 | 3.49 | 41 547 | 3.01 | 41 374 | 2.75 | |||
30 | 36 816 | 40 485 | 4.68 | 40 054 | 4.11 | 39 886 | 3.85 | |||
31 | 38 512 | 41 442 | 5.83 | 41 109 | 5.27 | 40 936 | 5.04 | |||
31 | 37 114 | 40 384 | 3.97 | 40 024 | 3.52 | 39 855 | 3.29 | |||
32 | 46 521 | 48 914 | 4.07 | 48 557 | 3.69 | 48 364 | 3.46 | |||
32 | 42 977 | 45 024 | 3.89 | 44 696 | 3.27 | 44 509 | 3.01 | |||
33 | 60 153 | 63 839 | 5.49 | 63 320 | 4.50 | 63 087 | 4.18 | |||
33 | 44 167 | 46 695 | 4.43 | 46 346 | 3.92 | 46 160 | 3.66 | |||
34 | 43 849 | 47 215 | 7.08 | 46 805 | 6.23 | 46 620 | 5.96 | |||
34 | 56 608 | 59 687 | 6.08 | 59 338 | 4.97 | 59 133 | 4.65 | |||
35 | 51 047 | 53 708 | 5.11 | 53 394 | 4.53 | 53 203 | 4.27 | |||
35 | 58 081 | 62 760 | 5.61 | 62 386 | 5.10 | 62 177 | 4.87 | |||
36 | 73 902 | 77 168 | 8.11 | 76 719 | 6.94 | 76 468 | 6.62 | |||
36 | 71 910 | 75 469 | 5.06 | 75 101 | 4.50 | 74 867 | 4.24 | |||
37 | 73 166 | 77 263 | 9.35 | 76 798 | 8.84 | 76 561 | 8.59 | |||
37 | 66 930 | 70 849 | 4.61 | 70 481 | 4.23 | 70 260 | 4.00 | |||
38 | 53 047 | 57 767 | 3.60 | 57 314 | 3.20 | 57 127 | 2.96 | |||
38 | 57 777 | 62 611 | 4.43 | 62 174 | 3.86 | 61 976 | 3.60 | |||
39 | 45 919 | 49 293 | 6.88 | 49 013 | 5.92 | 48 844 | 5.63 | |||
40 | 30 367 | 33 157 | 5.71 | 32 912 | 5.03 | 32 783 | 4.77 | |||
43 | 13 256 | 16 774 | 5.38 | 16 582 | 4.95 | 16 485 | 4.71 | |||
50 | 10 916 | 13 688 | 3.49 | 13 501 | 3.13 | 13 417 | 2.90 |
表5
不同情景下拟合结果①"
情景 Scenario | 林地期望值模型 LEV model | 调整系数 Ra2 | 最优轮伐期 Optimal rotation age/a | 林地期望值 LEV/(yuan·hm-2) | 碳汇与木材收益 比值Rct(%) |
情景1 Scenario 1 | LEVa=-14.649 1+1.127 9T-0.016 2T2 | 0.621 | 35 | 50 288 | 0.00 |
情景2 Scenario 2 | LEVb=-14.495 1+1.136 6T-0.016 3T2 | 0.617 | 35 | 53 638 | 4.19 |
情景3 Scenario 3 | LEVc=-14.542 2+1.136 1T-0.016 2T2 | 0.619 | 35 | 53 263 | 3.83 |
情景4 Scenario 4 | LEVd=-14.520 9+1.133 6T-0.016 2T2 | 0.619 | 35 | 53 071 | 3.51 |
表6
不同贴现率变动对对长白落叶松人工林最优轮伐期和林地期望值的影响"
贴现率 Discount rate(%) | 情景1 Scenario 1 | 情景2 Scenario 2 | 情景3 Scenario 3 | 情景4 Scenario 4 | |||||||
最优轮伐期 Optimal rotation age/a | 林地期望值 LEV/ (yuan·hm-2) | 最优轮伐期 Optimal rotation age/a | 林地期望值 LEV/ (yuan·hm-2) | 最优轮伐期 Optimal rotation age/a | 林地期望值 LEV/ (yuan·hm-2) | 最优轮伐期 Optimal rotation age/a | 林地期望值 LEV/ (yuan·hm-2) | ||||
1 | 39 | 741 644 | 39 | 762 414 | 39 | 756 936 | 39 | 753 148 | |||
3 | 37 | 151 189 | 37 | 157 438 | 37 | 156 090 | 37 | 155 313 | |||
5 | 35 | 50 288 | 35 | 53 638 | 35 | 53 263 | 35 | 53 071 | |||
7 | 33 | 16 061 | 33 | 18 189 | 33 | 18 049 | 33 | 17 984 | |||
9 | 31 | 2 026 | 31 | 3 496 | 31 | 3 433 | 31 | 3 407 |
巢林, 刘艳艳, 洪伟, 等. 碳汇木材复合经营对杉木人工林经济成熟龄及现值收益的影响. 福建农林大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 45 (4): 409- 419. | |
Chao L , Liu Y Y , Hong W , et al. Effect of combined carbon and timber management on net present value of economic maturity age in Cunninghamia lanceolata plantation. Journal of Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 2016, 45 (4): 409- 419. | |
胡海清, 罗碧珍, 魏书精, 等. 大兴安岭5种典型林型森林生物碳储量. 生态学报, 2015, 35 (17): 5745- 5760. | |
Hu H Q , Luo B Z , Wei S J , et al. Estimating biological carbon storage of five typical forest types in the Daxing' anling Mountains, Heilongjiang, China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2015, 35 (17): 5745- 5760. | |
黄宰胜, 陈钦. 不同情境下桉树碳汇林最佳轮伐期分析. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25 (S1): 25- 31. | |
Huang Z S , Chen Q . Analysis of the optimal rotation of eucalypt carbon sequestration forests under various scenarios. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2016, 25 (S1): 25- 31. | |
季元元. 2012. 中国碳汇林业发展前景研究. 南京: 南京林业大学. | |
Ji Y Y. 2012. Study on prospect of the development of carbon sequestration forest in China. Nanjing: Nanjing Forestry University. [in Chinese] | |
简盖元, 冯亮明, 刘伟平. 基于碳汇价值的森林最优轮伐期分析. 林业经济问题, 2011, 31 (1): 70- 75. | |
Jian G Y , Feng L M , Liu W P . Analysis of forest optimal rotation which base on the value of carbon sequestration. Issues of Forestry Economics, 2011, 31 (1): 70- 75. | |
蒋蕾, 刘兆刚, 董灵波. 大兴安岭天然落叶松林相容性立木含碳量模型研究. 植物研究, 2015, 35 (6): 929- 936. | |
Jiang L , Liu Z G , Dong L B . Carbon stocks model of compatible individual tree in the natural larch forest of Daxing'an Mountains. Bulletin of Botanical Research, 2015, 35 (6): 929- 936. | |
姜洋. 2010. 黑龙江省国有林区生物质能源发展战略研究. 哈尔滨: 东北林业大学. | |
Jiang Y. 2010. Study on the development strategy of biomass energy in state-owned forest region of Heilongjiang Province. Harbin: Northeast Forestry University. [in Chinese] | |
李晖, 曾伟生. 不同区域落叶松二元立木材积表的检验及差异分析. 林业科学, 2016, 52 (6): 157- 162. | |
Li H , Zeng W S . Validation and comparison of two-variable tree volume tables for Larix spp. in different regions of China. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2016, 52 (6): 157- 162. | |
李琦, 张绍文. 含碳汇收益的林业投资项目价值评估模型研究. 林业经济, 2019, 41 (11): 88- 96. | |
Li Q , Zhang S W . Study on value assessment model of forestry investment projects combing carbon sequestration revenue. Forestry Economics, 2019, 41 (11): 88- 96. | |
刘国华, 傅伯杰, 方精云. 中国森林碳动态及其对全球碳平衡的贡献. 生态学报, 2000, 20 (5): 733- 740. | |
Liu G H , Fu B J , Fang J Y . Carbon dynamics of Chinese forests and its contribution to global carbon balance. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2000, 20 (5): 733- 740. | |
吕瑞恒, 李国雷, 刘勇, 等. 不同立地条件下华北落叶松叶凋落物的分解特性. 林业科学, 2012, 48 (2): 31- 37. | |
Lü R H , Li G L , Liu Y , et al. Decomposition characteristics of coniferous litter under different site conditions in a Larix principis-rupprechtii plantation. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2012, 8 (2): 31- 37. | |
MartinF, 杨馥宁, 公培臣, 等. 土地收益的期望价值估算研究——无林地及未成熟林分的价值估算. 林业经济, 2007, 28 (6): 72- 77. | |
Martin F , Yang F N , Gong P C , et al. Calculation of the value which forest land and immature in stands possess for forestry. Forestry Economics, 2007, 28 (6): 72- 77. | |
彭娓, 董利虎, 李凤日. 基于可加性生物量模型的大兴安岭东部主要林型森林植被碳储量及其分配. 应用生态学报, 2016, 27 (12): 3749- 3758. | |
Peng W , Dong L H , Li F R . Carbon storage of forest vegetation and allocation for main forest types in the east of Daxing'an Mountains based on additive biomass model. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2016, 27 (12): 3749- 3758. | |
沈月琴, 王枫, 张耀启, 等. 中国南方杉木森林碳汇供给的经济分析. 林业科学, 2013, 49 (9): 140- 147. | |
Shen Y Q , Wang F , Zhang Y , et al. Economic analysis of Chinese Fir forest carbon sequestration supply in south China. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2013, 49 (9): 140- 147. | |
王鹤智. 2012. 东北林区林分生长动态模拟系统的研究. 哈尔滨: 东北林业大学. | |
Wang H Z. 2012. Dynamic simulating system for stand growth of forests in northeast China. Harbin: Northeast Forestry University. [in Chinese] | |
王蒙, 李凤日, 贾炜玮, 等. 黑龙江省落叶松人工林碳储量动态研究. 植物研究, 2013, 33 (5): 623- 628. | |
Wang M , Li F R , Jia W W , et al. Dynamic change of carbon storage for Larch plantation in Heilongjiang Province. Bulletin of Botanical Research, 2013, 33 (5): 623- 628. | |
王新闯, 齐光, 于大炮, 等. 吉林省森林生态系统的碳储量、碳密度及其分布. 应用生态学报, 2011, 22 (8): 2013- 2020. | |
Wang X C , Qi G , Yu D P , et al. Carbon storage, density, and distribution in forest ecosystems in Jilin Province of Northeast, China. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2011, 22 (8): 2013- 2020. | |
王小玲, 沈月琴, 王枫, 等. 不同经营主体和立地条件的马尾松经营经济效益评价. 林业经济问题, 2012, 32 (5): 412- 417.412-417, 421 | |
Wang X L , Shen Y Q , Wang F , et al. Economic benefit evaluation of masson pine based on different management subjects and site conditions. Issues of Forestry Economics, 2012, 32 (5): 412- 417.412-417, 421 | |
徐金良, 毛玉明, 成向荣. 间伐对杉木人工林碳储量的长期影响. 应用生态学报, 2014, 25 (7): 1898- 1904. | |
Xu J L , Mao Y M , Cheng X R , et al. Long-term effects of thinning on carbon storage in Cunninghamia lanceolata plantations. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2019, 25 (07): 1898- 1904. | |
武金翠, 周军, 张宇, 等. 毛竹林固碳增汇价值的动态变化: 以福建省为例. 林业科学, 2020, 56 (4): 181- 187. | |
Wu J C , Zhou J , Zhang Y , et al. Carbon sequestration value and its change of Phyllostachys edulis forest: a case study of Fujian province. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2020, 56 (4): 181- 187. | |
周伟, 高岚. 森林碳汇收益的实证分析——以广东省杉木林为例. 科技管理研究, 2015, 35 (2): 219- 223. | |
Zhou W , Gao L . Optimal forest harvest age considering carbon sequestration in multiple carbon pools. Science and Technology Management Research, 2015, 35 (2): 219- 223. | |
赵慧君. 2019. 中国林业碳汇项目开发潜力研究分析. 北京: 北京林业大学. | |
Zhao H J. 2019. Research and analysis on the development potential of forestry carbon sink projects in China. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University. [in Chinese] | |
朱臻, 沈月琴, 吴伟光, 等. 碳汇目标下农户森林经营最优决策及碳汇供给能力——基于浙江和江西两省调查. 生态学报, 2013, 33 (8): 2577- 2585. | |
Zhu Z , Shen Y Q , Wu W G , et al. Household optimal forest management decision and carbon supply: case from Zhejiang and Jiangxi Provinces. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33 (8): 2577- 2585. | |
朱臻, 沈月琴, 张耀启, 等. 碳汇经营目标下的林地期望价值变化及碳供给——基于杉木裸地造林假设研究. 林业科学, 2012, 48 (11): 112- 116. | |
Zhu Z , Shen Y Q , Zhang Y Q , et al. Change of forestland expected value and carbon supply in the objective of carbon sequestration: based on the Chinese fir plantation in bared land. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2012, 48 (11): 112- 116. | |
Asante P , Armstrong G W . Optimal forest harvest age considering carbon sequestration in multiple carbon pools: a comparative statics analysis. Journal of Forest Economics, 2012, 18 (2): 145- 156.
doi: 10.1016/j.jfe.2011.12.002 |
|
Asante P , Armstrong G W , Adamowicz W L . Carbon sequestration and the optimal forest harvest decision: a dynamic programming approach considering biomass and dead organic matter. Journal of Forest Economics, 2010, 17 (1): 3- 17. | |
Cao T , Valsta L , Mäkelä A . A comparison of carbon assessment methods for optimizing timber production and carbon sequestration in Scots pine stands. Forest Ecology and Management, 2010, 260 (10): 1726- 1734.
doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.07.053 |
|
Dong L B , Lu W , Liu Z G . Determining the optimal rotations of larch plantations when multiple carbon pools and wood products are valued. Forest Ecology and Management, 2020, 474, 118356.
doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118356 |
|
Gong Z W , O'Hara K L , Li W Z , et al. Optimal forest rotation periods: integrating timber production and carbon sequestration benefits in Pinus tabulaeformis plantations on the Loess Plateau, P. R. China. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 2019, 38 (6): 591- 613.
doi: 10.1080/10549811.2019.1598442 |
|
Hoel M , Holtsmark B , Holtsmark K . Faustmann and the climate. Journal of Forest Economics, 2014, 20 (2): 192- 210.
doi: 10.1016/j.jfe.2014.04.003 |
|
Holtsmark B , Hoel M , Holtsmark K . Optimal harvest age considering multiple carbon pools - a comment. Journal of Forest Economics, 2013, 19 (1): 87- 95.
doi: 10.1016/j.jfe.2012.09.002 |
|
Kooten G C , Binkley C S , Delcourt G . Effect of carbon taxes and subsidies on optimal forest rotation age and supply of carbon services. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1995, 77 (2): 365- 374.
doi: 10.2307/1243546 |
|
Méndez M A , Rico M J . Heuristic forest planning model for optimizing timber production and carbon sequestration in teak plantations. iForest-Biogeosciences and Forestry, 2017, 10 (1): 430- 439. | |
Peng W , Pukkala T , Jin X , et al. Optimal management of larch (Larix olgensis A. Henry) plantations in Northeast China when timber production and carbon stock are considered. Annals of Forest Science, 2018, 75 (2): 1- 15. | |
West T , Wilson C , Vrachioli M , et al. Carbon payments for extended rotations in forest plantations: Conflicting insights from a theoretical model. Ecological Economics, 2019, 163 (9): 70- 76. | |
World Bank Group. 2019. State and trends of carbon pricing 2019. Washington, D. C. : World Bank Group. | |
Zengin H , Unal M E . Analyzing the effect of carbon prices on wood production and harvest scheduling in a managed forest in Turkey. Forest Policy and Economics, 2019, 103, 28- 35.
doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2017.10.017 |
|
Zhou W , Gao L . The impact of carbon trade on the management of short-rotation forest plantations. Forest Policy and Economics, 2016, 62, 30- 35.
doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2015.10.008 |
[1] | 卢峰, 顾光同, 曹先磊, 吴伟光. 基于耦合效应的林业碳汇项目风险[J]. 林业科学, 2022, 58(5): 161-176. |
[2] | 刘林,张旭,余素君,孙洪刚,姜景民,王宇华. 湿地松材脂兼用林最优轮伐期的经济分析——以江西省景德镇市枫树山林场为例[J]. 林业科学, 2022, 58(4): 62-73. |
[3] | 付晓,张煜星,王雪军. 2060年前我国森林生物量碳库及碳汇潜力预测[J]. 林业科学, 2022, 58(2): 32-41. |
[4] | 白羽,庞勇,夏晓运,贾炜玮. 长白落叶松解析木数据参数化3-PG模型[J]. 林业科学, 2022, 58(1): 98-110. |
[5] | 朱爱琴,顾蕾,朱玮强,冯贻勇,陈伟,周国模. 外生激励和价值认同对农户持续参与森林碳汇项目意愿的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2021, 57(8): 176-188. |
[6] | 夏晓运,庞勇,黄庆丰,吴荣,陈东升,白羽. 基于3-PG模型的长白落叶松生物量生长预测[J]. 林业科学, 2021, 57(3): 67-78. |
[7] | 邹玉友,李金秋,齐英南,贯君,田国双. 碳交易背景下控排企业林业碳汇需求意愿及其影响因素——基于计划行为理论的探讨[J]. 林业科学, 2020, 56(8): 162-172. |
[8] | 胡海清,罗碧珍,罗斯生,魏书精,王振师,李小川,刘菲. 林火干扰对森林生态系统碳库的影响研究进展[J]. 林业科学, 2020, 56(4): 160-169. |
[9] | 龙飞,沈月琴,祁慧博,刘梅娟. 基于企业减排需求的森林碳汇定价机制[J]. 林业科学, 2020, 56(2): 164-173. |
[10] | 曹业凡,汪来发,王曦茁,范结红. 松材线虫对长白落叶松的致病性[J]. 林业科学, 2020, 56(11): 108-115. |
[11] | 王志康, 许晨阳, 耿增超, 刘莉丽, 侯琳, 杜璨, 王强, 吕东唯. 基于扣除根系体积新方法的秦岭辛家山2种林分土壤有机碳密度特征[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(6): 133-141. |
[12] | 刘宝, 王民煌, 余再鹏, 林思祖, 林开敏. 中亚热带天然林改造成人工林后土壤呼吸的变化特征[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(4): 1-12. |
[13] | 宋跃, 李淑娟, 张含国, 白晓明, 毕显禹, 董实伟, 董昊. 落叶松胚性愈伤组织悬浮培养体系的优化[J]. 林业科学, 2018, 54(7): 146-154. |
[14] | 钱杨, 孙洪刚, 董汝湘, 姜景民. 针叶树碳水化合物分配研究进展[J]. 林业科学, 2018, 54(1): 141-153. |
[15] | 姜礅, 薛羿, 徐智文, 王嘉冰, 孟昭军, 严善春. 喷施茉莉酸诱导长白落叶松抗性对舞毒蛾生长发育的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2018, 54(1): 162-167. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||