Literature DB >> 32161437

Evaluating Potential Sources of Aggregation Bias with a Structural Optimization Model of the U.S. Forest Sector.

Christopher M Wade1, Justin S Baker1, Greg Latta2, Sara B Ohrel3.   

Abstract

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.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 32161437      PMCID: PMC7065410          DOI: 10.1561/112.00000503

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J For Econ        ISSN: 1104-6899            Impact factor:   2.000


  5 in total

1.  Potential complementarity between forest carbon sequestration incentives and biomass energy expansion.

Authors:  J S Baker; C M Wade; B L Sohngen; S Ohrel; A A Fawcett
Journal:  Energy Policy       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 6.142

2.  Health co-benefits from air pollution and mitigation costs of the Paris Agreement: a modelling study.

Authors:  Anil Markandya; Jon Sampedro; Steven J Smith; Rita Van Dingenen; Cristina Pizarro-Irizar; Iñaki Arto; Mikel González-Eguino
Journal:  Lancet Planet Health       Date:  2018-03-02

3.  Assessing the INDCs' land use, land use change, and forest emission projections.

Authors:  Nicklas Forsell; Olga Turkovska; Mykola Gusti; Michael Obersteiner; Michel den Elzen; Petr Havlik
Journal:  Carbon Balance Manag       Date:  2016-12-08

4.  From sink to source: Regional variation in U.S. forest carbon futures.

Authors:  David N Wear; John W Coulston
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-11-12       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Hotspots of uncertainty in land-use and land-cover change projections: a global-scale model comparison.

Authors:  Reinhard Prestele; Peter Alexander; Mark D A Rounsevell; Almut Arneth; Katherine Calvin; Jonathan Doelman; David A Eitelberg; Kerstin Engström; Shinichiro Fujimori; Tomoko Hasegawa; Petr Havlik; Florian Humpenöder; Atul K Jain; Tamás Krisztin; Page Kyle; Prasanth Meiyappan; Alexander Popp; Ronald D Sands; Rüdiger Schaldach; Jan Schüngel; Elke Stehfest; Andrzej Tabeau; Hans Van Meijl; Jasper Van Vliet; Peter H Verburg
Journal:  Glob Chang Biol       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 10.863

  5 in total
  1 in total

1.  Policy Perspective on the Role of Forest Sector Modeling.

Authors:  Sara Bushey Ohrel
Journal:  J For Econ       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 2.000

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.