Published December 2010 | Version v1
Journal article

Global timber investments, wood costs, regulation, and risk

  • 1. Forestry and Environmental Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC (United States)
  • 2. Universidad Nacional de Misiones (UNAM), Lisandro de la Torre s/n, CP 3380, Eldorado, Misiones (Argentina)
  • 3. Universidad de Concepcion, Victoria 631, Casilla 160-C - Correo 3, Concepcion (Chile)
  • 4. Instituto Nacional de Investigacion Agropecuria, INIA Tacuarembo, Ruta 5, Km 386, Tacuarembo (Uruguay)
  • 5. Weyerhaeuser Company, La Rosa 765, Melo (Uruguay)
  • 6. CellFor, 247 Davis Street, Athens, GA (United States)
  • 7. Universidade do Contestado, R. Joaquim Nabuco, 314 Bairro Cidade Nova, Porto Uniao, Santa Catarina (Brazil)
  • 8. Universidade Federal do Parana, Av. Pref. Lothario Meissner, 900, 80210-170, Jardim Botanico, Curitiba, Parana (Brazil)
  • 9. Komatiland Forests (Pty) Ltd, P.O. Box 14228, Nelspruit (South Africa)
  • 10. World Bank, 1818 H. Street NW, Washington, DC (United States)
  • 11. New Zealand Forest Research Institute Ltd., Scion, 49 Sala St., Rotorua (New Zealand)
  • 12. Mason, Bruce, and Girard, Inc., 707 SW Washington St., Portland, Oregon (United States)
  • 13. Abt Associates, 4550 Montgomery Avenue, Bethesda, MD (United States)
  • 14. International Institute of Tropical Forestry, USDA Forest Service, c/o 920 Main Campus Dr. Suite 300, Raleigh, NC (United States)

Description

We estimated financial returns and wood production costs in 2008 for the primary timber plantation species. Excluding land costs, returns for exotic plantations in almost all of South America - Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Colombia, Venezuela, and Paraguay - were substantial. Eucalyptus species returns were generally greater than those for Pinus species in each country, with most having Internal Rates of Return (IRRs) of 20% per year or more, as did teak. Pinus species in South America were generally closer to 15%, except in Argentina, where they were 20%. IRRs were less, but still attractive for plantations of coniferous or deciduous species in China, South Africa, New Zealand, Indonesia, and the United States, ranging from 7% to 12%. Costs of wood production at the cost of capital of 8% per year were generally cheapest for countries with high rates of return and for pulpwood fiber production, which would favor vertically integrated firms in Latin America. But wood costs at stumpage market prices were much greater, making net wood costs for open market wood more similar among countries. In the Americas, Chile and Brazil had the most regulatory components of sustainable forest management, followed by Misiones, Argentina and Oregon in the U.S. New Zealand, the United States, and Chile had the best rankings regarding risk from political, commercial, war, or government actions and for the ease of doing business. Conversely, Venezuela, Indonesia, Colombia, and Argentina had high risk ratings, and Brazil, Indonesia, and Venezuela were ranked as more difficult countries for ease of business. (author)

Availability note (English)

Available from Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.05.008

Additional details

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Biomass and Bioenergy
Journal Volume
34
Journal Issue
12
Journal Page Range
p. 1667-1678
ISSN
0961-9534
CODEN
BMSBEO

Optional Information

Notes
Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved; Current and potential capabilities of wood production systems in the Southeastern U.S.