Efficiency Evaluation of Forest Carbon Sinks: A Case Study of Russia

被引:4
|
作者
Vilkov, Arsenii [1 ]
Tian, Gang [1 ]
机构
[1] Northeast Forestry Univ, Coll Econ & Management, Harbin 150040, Peoples R China
来源
FORESTS | 2024年 / 15卷 / 04期
关键词
forest carbon sink efficiency; SBM-undesirable output model; Malmquist index; Low-carbon development strategy; forest carbon offset projects; Russia; PROJECTS; OUTPUT;
D O I
10.3390/f15040649
中图分类号
S7 [林业];
学科分类号
0829 ; 0907 ;
摘要
Forest carbon sinks in Russia are an integral part of the national "Low-carbon development strategy". However, the influence of natural disasters and various land use policies in economic regions (ERs) raises the issue of forest carbon sink efficiency (FCSE). This study adopted a DEA-SBM model that considers undesirable outputs to measure FCSE, and the Malmquist index (MI) approach to analyze total factor productivity (TFP) of forest carbon sinks, using panel data from 2009 to 2021. The results show that the average FCSE was 0.788, with an improvement rate of 21.2%. Scale efficiency is the main factor constraining FCSE in Russia. In twelve ERs, forest carbon sinks are efficient only in the Kaliningrad and West Siberian ERs. In general, forest carbon sinks in Russia are inefficient mainly due to forest fires and other natural disturbances (82.33%); excessive logging activities (38.64%); and lack of carbon absorption capacity (31.70%). The average score of their TFP is 0.970, indicating a decline of 3% over the study period. This is primarily attributed to the decline of 1.6% in technological change. The productivity of forest carbon sinks remained static only in the Kaliningrad ER, while other economic regions performed deterioration trends. Therefore, Russia should enhance the efficiency of forest carbon sinks.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Carbon stores, sinks, and sources in forests of northwestern Russia: Can we reconcile forest inventories with remote sensing results?
    Krankina, ON
    Harmon, ME
    Cohen, WB
    Oetter, DR
    Zyrina, O
    Duane, MV
    CLIMATIC CHANGE, 2004, 67 (2-3) : 257 - 272
  • [22] Carbon Stores, Sinks, and Sources in Forests of Northwestern Russia: Can We Reconcile Forest Inventories with Remote Sensing Results?
    Olga N. Krankina
    Mark E. Harmon
    Warren B. Cohen
    Doug R. Oetter
    Zyrina Olga
    Maureen V. Duane
    Climatic Change, 2004, 67 : 257 - 272
  • [23] Forest Carbon Stock Accounting and Evaluation: A Case Study of Three Forest Stands in Dongguan, South China
    He, Shaojuan
    Zhu, Jianyun
    Ye, Yongchang
    2011 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING (ICESSE 2011), VOL 3, 2011, : 279 - 286
  • [24] Hybrid game cross efficiency evaluation models based on interval data: A case of forest carbon sequestration
    Huang, Yan
    He, Xiao
    Dai, Yongwu
    Wang, Ying-Ming
    EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2022, 204
  • [25] Is Regulation Protection? Forest Logging Quota Impact on Forest Carbon Sinks in China
    Zhang, Ziqiang
    He, Jie
    Huang, Ming
    Zhou, Wei
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2023, 15 (18)
  • [26] Prediction and spillover effects of forest expansion and management to increase carbon sinks in karst mountainous areas: A case study in Guizhou, China
    Zhu, Meng
    Zhou, Zhongfa
    Wu, Xiaopiao
    Wan, Jiaxue
    Wang, Jiale
    Zheng, Jiajia
    Liu, Rongping
    Li, Fadong
    LAND USE POLICY, 2025, 151
  • [27] Efficiency Evaluation and Resource Optimization of Forestry Carbon Sequestration Projects: A Case Study of State-Owned Forest Farms in Fujian Province
    You, Meizhu
    Huang, Yan
    Wu, Nan
    Yuan, Xiangzhou
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2025, 17 (01)
  • [28] Forest phytomass and carbon in European Russia
    Ukrainian Natl Agrarian Univ, Kiev, Ukraine
    Biomass Bioenergy, 2 (91-99):
  • [29] Forest phytomass and carbon in European Russia
    Lakida, P
    Nilsson, S
    Shvidenko, A
    BIOMASS & BIOENERGY, 1997, 12 (02): : 91 - 99
  • [30] How costly are carbon offsets? A meta-analysis of carbon forest sinks
    van Kooten, GC
    Eagle, AJ
    Manley, J
    Smolak, T
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2004, 7 (04) : 239 - 251