To harvest or not to harvest? Forest management as a trade-off between bioenergy production and carbon sink.

Due to global warming and energy conservation, the importance of forests should be seriously considered. Forest could not only produce bioenergy by harvest to substitute fossil fuels, but also sequestrate carbon dioxide from the air without harvest. How to measure the trade-off between forests as bioenergy production and carbon sinks is the aim of this paper. The forest management for the trade-offs is modelled theoretically based on two perspectives of carbon reductions and benefits. The magnitude of trade-offs is calculated considering carbon reduction, ecological benefit, and economic benefit by empirical analysis based on the forestry database of 180 countries. The empirical results reveal that the magnitude of trade-offs is lowest in Iran both between carbon sinks and carbon flow from the perspective of carbon reductions and that between economic benefit and ecological benefit based on forest income. It implied the coordinated development of wood fuel and carbon sinks in Iran's forest management. Meanwhile, the magnitude of trade-offs is highest in Ecuador between carbon sinks and carbon flow, and it is highest in Tongo between economic benefit and ecological benefit. It showed that forest management should be improved. Furthermore, energy and environment policy implications could be proposed based on forest management. Effective forest management should be considered to help fully realize energy conservation and environment protection. Image 1 • The trade-off is explored which forest is as bioenergy production or carbon sink. • Trade-offs are modelled theoretically based on carbon reductions and benefits. • The magnitudes of trade-offs in 180 countries are compared. • Energy and environment policy implications could be proposed by forest management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]