[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v65y2008i3p590-601.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mixed forests and finance -- Methodological approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Knoke, Thomas
Abstract
Mixed forest ecosystems show effects of risk compensation similar to diversified portfolios of stocks. Other than portfolios of stocks, the composition of long-lived forests cannot be adjusted at short notice to current market developments. Thus, the financial robustness of tree-species portfolios is very important. However, it is still an open question, which financial approaches are appropriate to evaluate the financial robustness of mixed forests compared to single-species forests. This paper analysed various possibilities to assess portfolios of tree species, namely, the mean-variance (MV) approach applied for the selection of optimal portfolios, the second order stochastic dominance (SSD) criterion and the information-gap approach. For the numerical analysis existing financial data on Norway spruce (Picea abies [L.] Karst.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) were used which were generated by Monte-Carlo simulations (MCS) under risk. Regardless of the analysed approach, in all cases pure forests did not outperform mixed forests. The MV approach was restricted by the assumption of normally distributed financial returns. It had the tendency to favour larger proportions of the high-risk species Norway spruce. SSD was only able to distinguish between the efficient and the inefficient portfolios. It showed that forests with less than 20% (financial returns generated by MCS) or less than 30% (normally distributed financial returns) of Norway spruce were inefficient. Under information-gap modelling the advantages of risk compensation in mixed forests became clearest. Under the given assumptions, the financial robustness of a mixed forest (50% European beech and 50% Norway spruce) was between 4 and 18 times greater than that of pure Norway spruce. Modern information-gap modelling is very similar to the well known safety first rules and as such it is not that novel to financial optimisation as it seems at the first glance. Although the information-gap theory resulted in the same rankings as the minimisation of the estimated probability of failure, it nevertheless proved to be useful as a supplement to the other methods. Against the background of severe uncertainty inherent in long-term decision-making in forestry, information-gap modelling is based on appropriate assumptions. It favours a decision, which promises the greatest tolerance to possible errors in the available information, while still guaranteeing a minimal acceptable financial result. In principle, classical safety first rules do the same. However, the information-gap model is able to quantify the immunity of a decision against errors in the estimated financial data. From a theoretical point of view, this approach provides a supplementary and methodologically sound opportunity to incorporate severe uncertainty in decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Knoke, Thomas, 2008. "Mixed forests and finance -- Methodological approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 590-601, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:65:y:2008:i:3:p:590-601
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(07)00436-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pablo C. Benítez & Timo Kuosmanen & Roland Olschewski & G. Cornelis van Kooten, 2006. "Conservation Payments under Risk: A Stochastic Dominance Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(1), pages 1-15.
    2. Wayne Y. Lee & Ramesh K. S. Rao, 1988. "Mean Lower Partial Moment Valuation and Lognormally Distributed Returns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 446-453, April.
    3. Yakov Ben-Haim, 2005. "Value-at-risk with info-gap uncertainty," Journal of Risk Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 6(5), pages 388-403, November.
    4. Post, Thierry & van Vliet, Pim, 2006. "Downside risk and asset pricing," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 823-849, March.
    5. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
    6. Jun-ya Gotoh & Hiroshi Konno, 2000. "Third Degree Stochastic Dominance and Mean-Risk Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 289-301, February.
    7. Timo Kuosmanen, 2004. "Efficient Diversification According to Stochastic Dominance Criteria," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1390-1406, October.
    8. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "Portfolio Selection," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 7(1), pages 77-91, March.
    9. Moog, Martin & Borchert, Herbert, 2001. "Increasing rotation periods during a time of decreasing profitability of forestry -- a paradox?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 101-116, June.
    10. Krysiak, Frank C., 2006. "Entropy, limits to growth, and the prospects for weak sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 182-191, June.
    11. William F. Sharpe, 1964. "Capital Asset Prices: A Theory Of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions Of Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 19(3), pages 425-442, September.
    12. Knoke, Thomas & Moog, Martin, 2005. "Timber harvesting versus forest reserves--producer prices for open-use areas in German beech forests (Fagus sylvatica L.)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 97-110, January.
    13. Figge, Frank & Hahn, Tobias, 2004. "Sustainable Value Added--measuring corporate contributions to sustainability beyond eco-efficiency," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 173-187, February.
    14. V.-P. Heikkinen & & Timo Kuosmanen, 2002. "Stochastic Dominance Portfolio Analysis of Forestry Assets," Finance 0210002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Busby, Gwenlyn M. & Binkley, Clark S. & Chudy, Rafal P., 2020. "Constructing optimal global timberland investment portfolios," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    2. Davies, Susan & Bathgate, Stephen & Petr, Michal & Gale, Alan & Patenaude, Genevieve & Perks, Mike, 2020. "Drought risk to timber production – A risk versus return comparison of commercial conifer species in Scotland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    3. Ben-Haim, Yakov & Osteen, Craig D. & Moffitt, L. Joe, 2013. "Policy dilemma of innovation: An info-gap approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 130-138.
    4. Dragicevic, Arnaud & Lobianco, Antonello & Leblois, Antoine, 2016. "Forest planning and productivity-risk trade-off through the Markowitz mean-variance model," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 25-34.
    5. Janová, Jitka & Hampel, David & Kadlec, Jiří & Vrška, Tomáš, 2022. "Motivations behind the forest managers’ decision making about mixed forests in the Czech Republic," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    6. Bastit, Félix & Brunette, Marielle & Montagné-Huck, Claire, 2023. "Pests, wind and fire: A multi-hazard risk review for natural disturbances in forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    7. Wildberg, Johannes & Möhring, Bernhard, 2019. "Empirical analysis of the economic effect of tree species diversity based on the results of a forest accountancy data network," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    8. Alvarez, Sergio & Larkin, Sherry L. & Ropicki, Andrew, 2017. "Optimizing provision of ecosystem services using modern portfolio theory," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 25-37.
    9. Marielle Brunette & Arnaud Dragicevic & Jonathan Lenglet & Alexandra Niedzwiedz & Vincent Badeau & Jean-Luc Dupouey, 2017. "Biotechnical portfolio management of mixed-species forests," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 223-245, July.
    10. Grilli, Gianluca & Jonkisz, Jaroslaw & Ciolli, Marco & Lesinski, Jerzy, 2016. "Mixed forests and ecosystem services: Investigating stakeholders' perceptions in a case study in the Polish Carpathians," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 11-17.
    11. Friedrich, Stefan & Paul, Carola & Brandl, Susanne & Biber, Peter & Messerer, Katharina & Knoke, Thomas, 2019. "Economic impact of growth effects in mixed stands of Norway spruce and European beech – A simulation based study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 65-80.
    12. Félix Bastit & Marielle Brunette & Claire Montagne-Huck, 2021. "Earth, wind and fire: A multi-hazard risk review for natural disturbances in forests," Working Papers of BETA 2021-25, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    13. Hildebrandt, Patrick & Knoke, Thomas, 2009. "Optimizing the shares of native tree species in forest plantations with biased financial parameters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2825-2833, September.
    14. Hildebrandt, Patrick & Knoke, Thomas, 2011. "Investment decisions under uncertainty--A methodological review on forest science studies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, January.
    15. Liu Yang & Hongzan Jiao, 2022. "Spatiotemporal Changes in Ecosystem Services Value and Its Driving Factors in the Karst Region of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-21, May.
    16. Torres, Bolier & Günter, Sven & Acevedo-Cabra, Ricardo & Knoke, Thomas, 2018. "Livelihood strategies, ethnicity and rural income: The case of migrant settlers and indigenous populations in the Ecuadorian Amazon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 22-34.
    17. Fraschini, Filippo & Hunt, Alistair & Zoboli, Roberto, 2022. "Decision tools for adaptation to climate change: Portfolio analysis of tea plantation investments in Rwanda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    18. Xinyue Yang & Ye Song & Mingjun Sun & Hongjun Peng, 2020. "Strategies for Capital Constrained Timber and Carbon Sink Supply Chain under the Cap-and-Trade Scheme," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-15, May.
    19. Ben-Haim, Yakov, 2021. "Feedback for energy conservation: An info-gap approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hildebrandt, Patrick & Knoke, Thomas, 2011. "Investment decisions under uncertainty--A methodological review on forest science studies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, January.
    2. Hildebrandt, Patrick & Knoke, Thomas, 2009. "Optimizing the shares of native tree species in forest plantations with biased financial parameters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2825-2833, September.
    3. Levy, Haim & Levy, Moshe, 2021. "Stocks versus bonds for the long run when a riskless asset is available," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    4. Branda, Martin, 2013. "Diversification-consistent data envelopment analysis with general deviation measures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 226(3), pages 626-635.
    5. repec:wvu:wpaper:10-08 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Wong, Wing-Keung, 2007. "Stochastic dominance and mean-variance measures of profit and loss for business planning and investment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(2), pages 829-843, October.
    7. Clasen, Christian & Griess, Verena C. & Knoke, Thomas, 2011. "Financial consequences of losing admixed tree species: A new approach to value increased financial risks by ungulate browsing," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 503-511, July.
    8. Matthies, Brent D. & Kalliokoski, Tuomo & Ekholm, Tommi & Hoen, Hans Fredrik & Valsta, Lauri T., 2015. "Risk, reward, and payments for ecosystem services: A portfolio approach to ecosystem services and forestland investment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 1-12.
    9. Hooi Hooi Lean & Michael McAleer & Wing-Keung Wong, 2013. "Risk-averse and Risk-seeking Investor Preferences for Oil Spot and Futures," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2013-31, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico, revised Aug 2013.
    10. Figge, Frank & Hahn, Tobias & Barkemeyer, Ralf, 2014. "The If, How and Where of assessing sustainable resource use," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 274-283.
    11. Lizyayev, Andrey & Ruszczyński, Andrzej, 2012. "Tractable Almost Stochastic Dominance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 448-455.
    12. Briec, Walter & Kerstens, Kristiaan, 2010. "Portfolio selection in multidimensional general and partial moment space," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 636-656, April.
    13. Hooi Hooi Lean & Michael McAleer & Wing-Keung Wong, 2010. "Market Efficiency of Oil Spot and Futures: A Stochastic Dominance Approach," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-705, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    14. Lean, H.H. & McAleer, M.J. & Wong, W.-K., 2010. "Investor preferences for oil spot and futures based on mean-variance and stochastic dominance," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI 2010-37, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
    15. Haim Levy & Enrico G. De Giorgi & Thorsten Hens, 2012. "Two Paradigms and Nobel Prizes in Economics: a Contradiction or Coexistence?," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 18(2), pages 163-182, March.
    16. Haim Levy, 2010. "The CAPM is Alive and Well: A Review and Synthesis," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 16(1), pages 43-71, January.
    17. Lean, Hooi Hooi & McAleer, Michael & Wong, Wing-Keung, 2010. "Market efficiency of oil spot and futures: A mean-variance and stochastic dominance approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 979-986, September.
    18. Daskalaki, Charoula & Skiadopoulos, George & Topaloglou, Nikolas, 2017. "Diversification benefits of commodities: A stochastic dominance efficiency approach," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 250-269.
    19. Salo, Ahti & Doumpos, Michalis & Liesiö, Juuso & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2024. "Fifty years of portfolio optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 318(1), pages 1-18.
    20. Enrico G. De Giorgi & Ola Mahmoud, 2016. "Diversification preferences in the theory of choice," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 39(2), pages 143-174, November.
    21. Levy, Moshe & Levy, Haim, 2001. "Testing for risk aversion: a stochastic dominance approach," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 233-240, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:65:y:2008:i:3:p:590-601. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.