基于碳汇收益和木材收益损失的碳汇造林补偿标准研究

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2022.04.15

浙江农业学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (4): 790-800.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2022.04.15

基于碳汇收益和木材收益损失的碳汇造林补偿标准研究

董捷(), 曾咪

华中农业大学公共管理学院,湖北武汉 430070

收稿日期:2021-02-28 出版日期:2022-04-25 发布日期:2022-04-28
作者简介:董捷(1960—),女,湖北武穴人,博士,教授,研究方向为土地资源经济。E-mail: dongjie@mail.hzau.edu.cn
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(71774064)

Research on compensation standard for carbon sequestration afforestation based on carbon sequestration income and loss of wood income

DONG Jie(), ZENG Mi

College of Public Administration, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China

Received:2021-02-28 Online:2022-04-25 Published:2022-04-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

根据湖北省咸宁市通山县、嘉鱼县和崇阳县的实地调研数据,运用改进的Faustmann-Hartman模型测算杉木碳汇林在不同林龄的碳汇收益、木材收益和林地期望价值,基于碳汇造林带来的林业碳汇收益和农户损失的木材收益综合测算碳汇造林的生态补偿标准,并分析木材价格、碳价格和利率等经济因素变化对补偿标准制定的影响。结果表明:在设定的条件下,综合木材收益和碳汇收益的林地期望价值在林龄22 a时达到最大值43 986.01元·hm^-2,与之相比,林龄30 a时木材收益仅为29 593.42元·hm^-2,碳汇收益和农户损失的木材收益的综合价值为14 392.59元·hm^-2。当补偿期限为30 a时,碳汇造林的生态补偿标准为832.33元·hm^-2·a^-1。碳汇造林补偿标准对木材价格变动的敏感性最高,其次是利率,最后是碳价格。基于上述结论,建议综合碳汇收益和农户损失的木材收益制定合理的碳汇造林生态补偿标准,并加强对农户营造碳汇林的技术培训,建立健全的碳交易市场制度,以保障林业碳汇的供给,实现多效益的协同发展。

关键词: 碳汇造林, 补偿标准, 碳交易, 林地期望价值, Faustmann-Hartman模型

Abstract:

Based on the survey data in Tongshan County, Jiayu County and Chongyang County of Xianning City in Hubei Province, China, the improved Faustmann-Hartman model was introduced to calculate the carbon sequestration income, wood income and expected value of forestland of carbon sequestration afforestation with Chinese fur under different stand ages. Then, the compensation standard for carbon sequestration afforestation was determined based on the carbon sequestration income and the loss of wood income of farmers, and the impact of economic factors such as wood price, carbon price and interest rate on compensation standard was discussed. It was shown that the expected value of forestland (combined with wood income and carbon sequestration income) reached the maximum value of 43 986.01 yuan·hm^-2 in 22 a under the given conditions. Compared with the maximum expected value of forestland, the wood income in 30 a was only 29 593.42 yuan·hm^-2. Thus, the ecological compensation, which should be the comprehensive of carbon sequestration income and farmer’s loss of wood income, was 14 392.59 yuan·hm^-2. When the compensation period was set as 30 a, the ecological compensation standard for carbon sequestration afforestation should be 832.33 yuan·hm^-2·a^-1. The compensation standard was most sensitive to changes of wood price, which was followed by the interest rate, and finally the carbon price. Based on the above findings, it was recommended to formulate reasonable compensation standard for carbon sequestration afforestation based on carbon sequestration income and loss of wood income, strengthen technical training for farmers on carbon sequestration afforestation, and establish a sound carbon trading market system to ensure forestry carbon sequestration supply and achieve multi-benefit coordinated development.

Key words: carbon sequestration afforestation, compensation standard, carbon trading, expected value of forestland, Faustmann-Hartman model

中图分类号:

S788

董捷, 曾咪. 基于碳汇收益和木材收益损失的碳汇造林补偿标准研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2022, 34(4): 790-800.

DONG Jie, ZENG Mi. Research on compensation standard for carbon sequestration afforestation based on carbon sequestration income and loss of wood income[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2022, 34(4): 790-800.

图/表 7

参考文献 26

[1]	HURRELL A, SENGUPTA S. Emerging powers, North-South relations and global climate politics[J]. International Affairs, 2012, 88(3): 463-484. DOI URL
[2]	李怒云, 陆霁. 林业碳汇与碳税制度设计之我见[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2012, 22(5): 110-113.
	LI N Y, LU J. Study on forestry carbon and carbon tax system[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2012, 22(5): 110-113. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[3]	曹先磊, 张颖, 石小亮, 等. 碳交易视角下森林碳汇生态补偿优化管理研究进展[J]. 资源开发与市场, 2017, 33(4): 430-435.
	CAO X L, ZHANG Y, SHI X L, et al. Research progress on optimal management of ecological compensation of forest carbon sequestration from perspective of carbon trading[J]. Resource Development & Market, 2017, 33(4): 430-435. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	李怒云, 袁金鸿. 林业碳汇自愿交易的中国样本: 创建碳汇交易体系实现生态产品货币化[J]. 林业资源管理, 2015(5): 1-7.
	LI N Y, YUAN J H. Chinese sample of forestry carbon voluntary trade: set up carbon trade system and monetize ecological products[J]. Forest Resources Management, 2015(5): 1-7. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[5]	杨帆, 曾维忠, 张维康, 等. 林农森林碳汇项目持续参与意愿及其影响因素[J]. 林业科学, 2016, 52(7): 138-147.
	YANG F, ZENG W Z, ZHANG W K, et al. Foresters’ constant participation willingness and affecting factors in forest carbon sequestration project[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2016, 52(7): 138-147. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	曹先磊, 张颖, 石小亮, 等. 竹子造林CCER项目碳汇价值动态评估及敏感性分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2017, 26(2): 247-256.
	CAO X L, ZHANG Y, SHI X L, et al. Study on the dynamic value of carbon sequestration of bamboo forestation project in CCER market and its sensitivity[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2017, 26(2): 247-256. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[7]	于金娜. 黄土高原地区造林补贴标准研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2014.
	YU J N. Study on afforestation subsidy in Loess Plateau[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2014. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]	于金娜, 姚顺波. 基于碳汇效益视角的最优退耕还林补贴标准研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2012, 22(7): 34-39.
	YU J N, YAO S B. Optimal subsidy of SLCP in China from the perspective of carbon sequestration benefit[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2012, 22(7): 34-39. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	杨浩, 曾圣丰, 曾维忠, 等. 基于希克斯分析法的中国森林碳汇造林生态补偿: 以“放牧地-碳汇林地”土地用途转变为例[J]. 科技管理研究, 2016, 36(9): 221-227.
	YANG H, ZENG S F, ZENG W Z, et al. Ecological compensation of forest carbon sequestration in China based on Hicks analysis: a case study of the land use change from grazing to planting carbon sequestration forest[J]. Science and Technology Management Research, 2016, 36(9): 221-227. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	黄宰胜, 陈治淇, 陈钦. 林农碳汇林经营受偿意愿影响因素分析: 基于计划行为理论[J]. 林业经济, 2017, 39(3): 46-52.
	HUANG Z S, CHEN Z Q, CHEN Q. Analysis on influencing factors of the willingness to accept compensation of carbon sinks forest management: based on the theory of planned behavior[J]. Forestry Economics, 2017, 39(3): 46-52. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]	张巍. 区域碳补偿标准及额度研究[J]. 统计与决策, 2019, 35(24): 55-58.
	ZHANG W. Research on regional carbon compensation standards and amounts[J]. Statistics & Decision, 2019, 35(24): 55-58. (in Chinese)
[12]	曹先磊. 碳交易视角下人工造林固碳效应价值评价研究: 以迭部县为例[D]. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2018.
	CAO X L. Study on the effects of carbon sequestration of artificial afforestation and its value evaluation under the carbon trading perspective: a case study in Diebu County[D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2018. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]	薄其皇. 基于机会成本的森林生态补偿标准研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2015.
	BO Q H. Study on the standard of forest eco-compensation based on opportunity cost[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2015. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[14]	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[J]. 林业科学, 2012(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[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2012(11): 112-116. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	任腾腾, 徐秀英. 碳交易情景下林地效益可能的变化分析:基于农户杉木地块调查分析[J]. 生态经济, 2013(2):158-161.
	REN T T, XU X Y. The analysis of forestland benefit possible changes of different types in carbon trading situation: based on Chinese fir plot investigation of farmer[J]. Ecological Economy, 2013(2):158-161. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	林卓, 吴承祯, 洪伟, 等. 杉木人工林碳汇木材复合经济收益分析及最优轮伐期确定: 基于时间序列预测模型[J]. 林业科学, 2016(10): 134-145.
	LIN Z, WU C Z, HONG W, et al. Economic benefits analysis of carbon sequestration and timber and determination of optimal rotation period for a Cunninghamia lanceolata plantation: based on time series model[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2016(10): 134-145. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]	王正淑, 王继军, 刘佳. 基于碳汇的县南沟流域退耕林地补偿标准研究[J]. 自然资源学报, 2016, 31(5): 779-788.
	WANG Z S, WANG J J, LIU J. Study on the compensation standard of returning farmland to forest in Xiannangou watershed from the perspective of carbon sink[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2016, 31(5): 779-788. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[18]	RICHARDS K R, STOKES C. A review of forest carbon sequestration cost studies: a dozen years of research[J]. Climatic Change, 2004, 63(1/2): 1-48. DOI URL
[19]	沈月琴, 王小玲, 王枫, 等. 农户经营杉木林的碳汇供给及其影响因素[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2013, 23(8): 42-47.
	SHEN Y Q, WANG X L, WANG F, et al. Carbon sequestration supply and its influencing factors for farmers operating fir in Chinese southern collective forest zone[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2013, 23(8): 42-47. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[20]	陈则生. 杉木人工林经济成熟龄的研究[J]. 华东森林经理, 2004, 18(3): 1-5.
	CHEN Z S. Study on the economic harvesting age for plantation Chinese fir[J]. East China Forest Management, 2004, 18(3): 1-5. (in Chinese)
[21]	王小玲, 沈月琴, 朱臻. 考虑碳汇收益的林地期望值最大化及其敏感性分析: 以杉木和马尾松为例[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2013, 37(4): 143-148.
	WANG X L, SHEN Y Q, ZHU Z. The maximization of land expectation value (LEV) considering carbon benefits and its sensitivity analysis: take Chinese fir and Masson pine for example[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 2013, 37(4): 143-148. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[22]	HARTMAN R. The harvesting decision when a standing forest has valuea[J]. Economic Inquiry, 1976, 14(1): 52-58. DOI URL
[23]	FAUSTMANN M. Calculation of the value which forest land and immature stands possess for forestry[M]//Economics of Forestry. London:Routledge, 2018: 1-40.
[24]	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[J]. 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[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(8): 2577-2585. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
[25]	林国庆, 柳婉郁. 考量碳吸存效益之杉木造林奖励金分析[J]. 农业经济, 2006(79):71-102.
	LIN K C, LIU W Y. An analysis of optimal afforestation subsidy for Cunninghamia lanceolata[J]. Agricultural Economy, 2006(79):71-102. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[26]	ALAVALAPATI J R R, STAINBACK G A, CARTER D R. Restoration of the longleaf pine ecosystem on private lands in the US South: an ecological economic analysis[J]. Ecological Economics, 2002, 40(3): 411-419. DOI URL

时间 Time	营造成本 Afforestation cost	抚育成本 Tending cost	管护成本 Maintenance cost	设施成本 Facilities cost	总计 Total
第一年First year	10 665.0	1 267.0	1 582.5	2 357.5	15 872.0
第二年Second year	3 572.5	676.0	476.5	956.0	5 681.0
第三年Third year	2 358.0	395.0	286.5	316.5	3 356.0
合计Sum up	16 595.5	2 338.0	2 345.5	3 630.0	24 909.0

时间 Time	营造成本 Afforestation cost	抚育成本 Tending cost	管护成本 Maintenance cost	设施成本 Facilities cost	总计 Total
第一年First year	10 665.0	1 267.0	1 582.5	2 357.5	15 872.0
第二年Second year	3 572.5	676.0	476.5	956.0	5 681.0
第三年Third year	2 358.0	395.0	286.5	316.5	3 356.0
合计Sum up	16 595.5	2 338.0	2 345.5	3 630.0	24 909.0

t/a	f(w)/(m³·hm^-2)	f(c)/(t·hm^-2)	V_w/(yuan·hm^-2)	V_c/(yuan·hm^-2)	V_z/(yuan·hm^-2)
2	0.34	0.16	-319 269.42	125.01	-319 144.41
4	3.16	1.47	-152 425.93	574.54	-151 851.39
6	10.28	4.77	-84 295.21	1 223.88	-83 071.33
8	21.82	10.13	-41 771.40	1 918.33	-39 853.07
10	36.84	17.11	-12 046.41	2 557.25	-9 489.16
12	54.03	25.09	8 913.49	3 092.31	12 005.80
4	72.11	33.48	23 192.94	3 510.28	26 703.22
16	90.08	41.83	32 296.77	3 817.56	36 114.33
18	107.21	49.78	37 449.68	4 029.55	41 479.23
20	123.05	57.14	39 661.16	4 164.27	43 825.43
22	137.36	63.78	39 746.93	4 239.08	43 986.01
24	150.05	69.67	38 349.20	4 269.07	42 618.27
26	161.16	74.83	35 960.98	4 266.69	40 227.67
28	170.77	79.29	32 952.00	4 241.75	37 193.75
30	179.01	83.12	29 593.42	4 201.81	33 795.23

t/a	f(w)/(m³·hm^-2)	f(c)/(t·hm^-2)	V_w/(yuan·hm^-2)	V_c/(yuan·hm^-2)	V_z/(yuan·hm^-2)
2	0.34	0.16	-319 269.42	125.01	-319 144.41
4	3.16	1.47	-152 425.93	574.54	-151 851.39
6	10.28	4.77	-84 295.21	1 223.88	-83 071.33
8	21.82	10.13	-41 771.40	1 918.33	-39 853.07
10	36.84	17.11	-12 046.41	2 557.25	-9 489.16
12	54.03	25.09	8 913.49	3 092.31	12 005.80
4	72.11	33.48	23 192.94	3 510.28	26 703.22
16	90.08	41.83	32 296.77	3 817.56	36 114.33
18	107.21	49.78	37 449.68	4 029.55	41 479.23
20	123.05	57.14	39 661.16	4 164.27	43 825.43
22	137.36	63.78	39 746.93	4 239.08	43 986.01
24	150.05	69.67	38 349.20	4 269.07	42 618.27
26	161.16	74.83	35 960.98	4 266.69	40 227.67
28	170.77	79.29	32 952.00	4 241.75	37 193.75
30	179.01	83.12	29 593.42	4 201.81	33 795.23

P_w/(yuan· m^-3)	T/a	V_w/(yuan· hm^-2)	V_c/(yuan· hm^-2)	V_z/(yuan· hm^-2)
600	28	-16 669.35	4 241.75	-12 427.60
900	22	10 539.96	4 239.08	14 779.04
1 200^*	22	39 746.93	4 239.08	43 986.01
1 500	20	69 783.29	4 164.27	73 947.56
1 800	20	99 905.41	4 164.27	104 069.68

基于碳汇收益和木材收益损失的碳汇造林补偿标准研究

Research on compensation standard for carbon sequestration afforestation based on carbon sequestration income and loss of wood income

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 26

相关文章 1

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

P_c/(yuan· t^-1)	T/a	V_w/(yuan· hm^-2)	V_c/(yuan· hm^-2)	V_z/(yuan· hm^-2)
7.23	22	39 746.93	581.35	40 328.28
26.36	22	39 746.93	2 119.54	41 866.47
52.72^*	22	39 746.93	4 239.08	43 986.01
79.07	22	39 746.93	6 357.81	46 104.74
98.20	22	39 746.93	7 896.01	47 642.94

r/%	T/a	V_w/(yuan· hm^-2)	V_c/(yuan· hm^-2)	V_z/(yuan· hm^-2)
2	24	140 417.56	112 334.05	252 751.61
3	22	72 626.48	5 824.62	78 451.11
4^*	22	39 746.93	4 239.08	43 986.01
5	20	21 173.46	3 227.40	24 400.85
6	20	9 245.67	2 602.50	11 848.17