Economic analysis of carbon sequestration in beech stands in the context of forest management and climate change

This paper shows that the process-based forest growth model 4C coupled with a socio-economic analysis model (SEA) is able to simulate the development of beech stands in Thuringia under different management regimes and to evaluate the economic balance of the stands for a period of over 100 years. The initialization of 4C was based on a thinning experiment of the TU Dresden, started in 1959 in the forest district Buchfart. The growth of four experimental plots was simulated up to 2006 by using historical climate data and from 2007 onwards using three climate scenarios up to the year 2058. Both the business balance and the carbon storage balances were discounted by a rate of 2% per anno. It turns out that a possible future climate change has a significant impact on the business balance and the carbon storage balance. The carbon storage balance from 1959 to 2058 ranges between 505 t C ha(-1) (OK scenario, weak thinning from above; see Table 3) and 712 t C ha(-1) (3K scenario, no management) or with 2% discount rate between 173 t C ha(-1) (OK scenario, weak thinning from above) and 235 t C ha(-1) (3K scenario, no management). The initial value of the experimental plots in 1959 was negative on all experimental sites with an average of -3469 (sic) ha(-1) (Table 1) and rose to 2058 by an average of 26 753 (sic) ha(-1) (Table 4). The averaged management costs during this period amounted to 305 (sic) ha(-1) yr(-1), whereas the proceeds by the sale of timber were on average 303 (sic) ha(-1) yr(-1). The capital-value of the four experimental sites, expanded by the increase of the liquidation value and discounted with a discount rate of 2% per anno, fluctuated in 2058 between 3111 (sic) ha(-1) (OK scenario, no management) and 8283 (sic) ha(-1) (3K scenario, heavy thinning from above). The study shows that from an economic point of view it is often more appropriate to abandon the usual thinning management of beech stands with heavy thinning from above in favour of management fostering stronger carbon storage. With medium thinning from below 27 t C ha(-1) were stored additionally and with no management 38 t C ha(-1) in comparison with heavy thinning from above. The increase in carbon storage in the forest by medium thinning from below and no management was, however, associated with additional costs or lower revenues of 112 (sic) and 123 (sic) per additional ton of carbon stored respectively (Table 5). These costs form the lower price limit at which a management change could pay off economically in the forest.