MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1548591564

Managing the Economic Impacts of Mountain Pine Beetle Outbreaks in Alberta

2007· preprint· en· W1548591564 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Blake Phillips, James A. Beck, Trevor Nickel

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2007
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMountain pine beetleEnvironmental scienceEcological successionForest managementForestryFoothillsEcologyGeographyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Output from the SELES MPB Landscape Scale Mountain Pine Beetle Model (Fall et al., 2004) was utilized to estimate potential mountain pine beetle spread rates within the Hinton Wood Products Forest Management Area (HFMA) of the Foothills Model Forest. From the SELES model output three spread rate scenarios were hypothesized. Scenario 1 hypothesized a Mountain Pine Beetle (MPB) spread rate slower than the rate estimated by the SELES MPB Model. Within Scenario 1, current Annual Allowable Cut (AAC) levels were hypothesized to be adequate to harvest MPB damaged lodgepole pine stands. Scenario 2 hypothesized that spread rates would be consistent with the recommended run from the SELES MPB Model, resulting in attack of the majority of the stands within the HFMA within 29 years. Scenario 3 hypothesized that spread rates would be higher than estimated by the SELES MPB Model, resulting in attack of the majority of lodgepole pine stand in the HFMA in 20 years (Scenario 3.1) or 10 years (Scenario 3.2). The even flow harvest rates required to utilize commercially viable stands attacked by MPB were determined (Surge Period). The modeling program Forest Muncher was utilized to estimate the decrease in AAC which could result from succession / salvage harvest of the majority of lodgepole pine stands within the HFMA within each scenario (Post Surge Period). Based on these AAC estimates, the potential economic impact of MPB attack influenced AAC changes was examined utilizing output from the Computable General Equilibrium Framework (CGE) Model developed by Mike Patriquin and Bill White of the Canadian Forest Service (Patriquin et al., 2005). Scenario 1 had a nearly inappreciable impact on the economic indicators for the forest industry or the total economy in the Foothills Model Forest Area. Within Scenario 2, forest industry revenue, royalties, labour income, and employment were estimated to increase by 40 – 50% during the Surge Period and decrease by 4.7– 6.0% in the Post Surge Period. Within Scenarios 3.1 and 3.2 forestry revenue, royalties, labour income and employment increases ranged from 70 – 90% for Scenario 3.1 and ranged from 160 – 210% for Scenario 3.2 during the Surge Period. Revenue, royalties, labour income and employment in the forest industry were estimated to decrease by 6 – 9% within the Post Surge Periods of Scenarios 3.1 and 3.2. Economic, forest industry capacity, social and environmental factors which may limit the feasibility of large scale salvage of mountain pine beetle damaged stands are discussed within the report.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207