Carbon sequestration and uneven-aged management of loblolly pine stands in the Southern USA: A joint optimization approach

Forest carbon sequestration is regarded as a viable and cost effective option for reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. Several studies have analyzed the effects of joint management of carbon and timber under different even-aged forest management scenarios. However, research specifically focused on the inclusion of carbon sequestration benefits into uneven-aged management has received little attention. Using the USDA Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS)-Southern Variant to generate growth and yield data, this study assessed management and financial effects of carbon benefits on the optimum uneven-aged management of loblolly pine stands. We applied the generalized Faustmann formula for uneven-aged management to calculate the land expectation value (LEV) at various levels of residual basal area and cutting cycle. Considering a biologically maximum stocking of 80 ft2/acre immediately before the harvest, this study determined the optimum management regimes of uneven-aged loblolly pine stands. This study also carried out sensitivity analyses to assess the effects of changes in interest rate, stumpage prices, and future land value and site productivity. In the joint management scenarios of timber production and carbon sequestration, carbon benefits could not alter the optimum management regimes of uneven-aged loblolly pine stands significantly. The stumpage prices and future land values were found to be less influential to the optimum joint management regimes. The percentage increase in financial returns was relatively more prominent in less productive sites.

► We applied the generalized Faustmann formula to uneven-aged loblolly pine management.
► Stand management were optimized for joint timber production and carbon sequestration.
► Changes in interest rate, stumpage prices and future land value affected the results.
► Carbon sequestration generated limited benefits under uneven-aged management.
► Less productive lands realized a larger percentage gain in value.