Cited by 179Forest Management and PolicyClimate Change Policy and EconomicsConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management

Policy design for forest carbon sequestration: A review of the literature

Open access
Gren, Ing-Marie, Aklilu, Abenezer Zeleke·2016·Forest Policy and Economics

Abstract

Forest carbon enhancement provides a low-cost opportunity in climate policy, but needs efficient policy design to be implemented. This paper reviews studies in economics on efficient design of policies for forest carbon sequestration and compares their findings against design systems in practice. Specific design problems are associated with the heterogeneity of landowners, uncertainty, additionality, and permanence in carbon projects. Different types of discounting of the value of the forest carbon sink compared with emissions abatement are suggested in the literature for management of most design problems, together with optimal contract design and emissions baselines for managing additionality and permanence in carbon sequestration. Design systems in practice, where forest carbon corresponds to 0.5% of all carbon volume subject to a pricing mechanism, mainly rely on additionality tests by approved standards on a project-by-project basis, and on buffer credits for management of permanence. Further development of forest carbon sinks as offsets in voluntary and compliance markets can be facilitated by applying tools for contract design and offset baseline management recommended in the literature.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.forpol.2016.06.008

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Permanence, sequestration uncertainty, availability of efficient financing mechanisms, and monitoring, reporting and verification systems are difficulties associated with forest-based abatement projects.

    “Permanence, sequestration uncertainty, the availability of efficient financing mechanisms as well as monitoring, reporting and verification systems are all difficulties associated around forest-based abatement projects (Gren and Aklilu 2016).”

    From Strategies for mitigation of climate change: a review (2020) · cites this paper as Gren and Aklilu 2016

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Angelsen, A. (Ed.), Moving Ahead With REDD: Issues, Options and Implications. Cen- ter for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia, pp. 77-86 (At http://www.cifor.org/publications/pdf_files/Books/BAngelsen0801.pdf (November 16, 2015, date of access))
  2. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), 2014. Climate Change 2014: A Syn- thesis Report. (At http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_ FINAL_All_Topics.pdf (May 29, 2015, date of access)).
  3. Pana, A.C., Gheyssens, J., 2015. Baseline choices and performance implications for REDD. J. Environ. Econ. Policy http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/606544.2015.1028465 (online, doi). · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gren, I.-M., & Aklilu, A. Z.
Affiliations
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE)
Corresponding author
Gren, Ing-Marie
Venue
Forest Policy and Economics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-09
Volume
70
Pages
128-136
ISSN
1389-9341 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2420133444
Cited by
179
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 6
FWCI
7.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Forest Policy and Economics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • EU-funded project COMPLEX (308601)
  • EU/BONUS funded BaltCoast project
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Keywords
forest carbon sequestration, carbon offset markets, policy design, additionality, permanence, discounting, contract design, voluntary carbon markets, compliance carbon markets, uncertainty, carbon pricing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review