Integrated modelling approaches to analysis of climate change impacts on forests and forest management

This paper reviews integrated economic and ecological models that address impacts and adaptation to climate change in the forest sector. Early economic model studies considered forests as one out of many possible impacts of climate change, while ecological model studies tended to limit the economic impacts to fixed price-assumptions. More recent studies include broader representations of both systems, but there are still few studies which can be regarded fully integrated. Full integration of ecological and economic models is needed to address forest management under climate change appropriately. The conclusion so far is that there are vast uncertainties about how climate change affects forests. This is partly due to the limited knowledge about the global implications of the social and economical adaptation to the effects of climate change on forests.

Economic tradeoffs in mitigation, due to different atmospheric lifetimes of CO2 and black carbon

Tradeoffs are examined between mitigating black carbon (BC) and carbon dioxide (CO2) for limiting peak global mean warming, using the following set of methods. A two-box climate model is used to simulate temperatures of the atmosphere and ocean for different rates of mitigation. Mitigation rates for BC and CO2 are characterized by respective timescales for e-folding reduction in emissions intensity of gross global product. There are respective emissions models that force the box model. Lastly there is a simple economics model, with cost of mitigation varying inversely with emission intensity. Constant mitigation timescale corresponds to mitigation at a constant annual rate, for example an e-folding timescale of 40 years corresponds to 2.5% reduction each year. Discounted present cost depends only on respective mitigation timescale and respective mitigation cost at present levels of emission intensity. Least-cost mitigation is posed as choosing respective e-folding timescales, to minimize total mitigation cost under a temperature constraint (e.g. within 2 degrees C above preindustrial). Peak warming is more sensitive to mitigation timescale for CO2 than for BC. Therefore rapid mitigation of CO2 emission intensity is essential to limiting peak warming, but simultaneous mitigation of BC can reduce total mitigation expenditure. (c) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.