Forest regulation comparison of forest outgrower schemes projects with own areas of forestry companies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.4336/2015.pfb.35.81.760Keywords:
Forest planning, Management regimes, Forest optimization, Rural propertiesAbstract
This study compared the forest planning of outgrower schemes projects with own areas of forestry companies´ areas. The total area of the companies was 41,178 ha distributed in 299 stands, and the outgrower areas were 2,445 ha distributed in 144 properties. The planning involved linear programming of areas in order to maximize the equivalent annuity (EA), under the condition (constraints) of a regulated structure at the end of planning. Two scenarios were evaluated: a) individual model - areas of outgrower schemes and companies in separate models, and b) single model - areas of outgrower schemes and companies in the same programming model. The EA difference of the individual to the single model was unfavorable to outgrowers, since it reduced its value by 14%. In the companies´ areas, the solution of the single regulation was favorable, increasing the EA in approximately 1%. It was also verified in a new scenario of the single model that if the wood of outgrowers were sold by stumpage, the global EA of these areas would increase by 0.9%, thus more attractive to landowners.Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
PFB reserves the right to edit manuscripts to correct grammar/spelling, improve clarity, and comply with the journal’s standards while maintaining the style of the authors.
The final version will be sent to the corresponding author for approval.
Published articles become the property of PFB.
Manuscripts may be used after publication without prior authorization from PFB, as long as the journal is credited.
Warning: figures published in PFB may only be reused with prior authorization from Embrapa Forestry.
All content in PFB is licensed under Creative Commons attribution (type BY-NC-ND).
The opinions and concepts expressed in manuscripts are the sole responsibility of their respective authors and not PFB.