MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluating Economic Impacts of Expanded Global Wood Energy Consumption with the USFPM/GFPM Model

2012· article· en· W1996025874 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peter J. Ince, Andrew D. Kramp, Kenneth E. Skog

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduct (mathematics)Forest productForestryNatural resource economicsAgricultural economicsBusinessGeographyEconomicsEnvironmental scienceEconomyForest managementMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A U.S. forest sector market module was developed within the general Global Forest Products Model. The U.S. module tracks regional timber markets, timber harvests by species group, and timber product outputs in greater detail than does the global model. This hybrid approach provides detailed regional market analysis for the United States although retaining the broader global market analysis. We describe how the U.S. Forest Products Module is structured within the global model and show projections based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scenarios with long‐range assumptions about economic activity, population growth, and wood energy demands. Results show that real prices for industrial roundwood would increase as a result of significant global expansion in wood energy demands. Expansion of global wood energy demands would influence the comparative economic advantages of U.S. versus foreign producers, with U.S. producers gaining some comparative advantages and increased net exports in scenarios where average foreign industrial roundwood prices are projected to increase more than in the United States. These results suggest that national wood energy policies should consider how the impacts of wood energy use on domestic forest product markets depend on trends in global forest product markets. Le module du secteur forestier aux États‐Unis (USFPM) a étéélaboréá partir du modéle mondial du secteur forestier (GFPM–Global Forest Products Model). Le USFPM permet de suivre l’évolution des marchés régionaux du bois d’œuvre, des récoltes de bois d’œuvre par groupe déessences et des produits dérivés de fa çon plus détaillée que le modéle mondial. Ce modéle hybride offre une analyse détaillée des marchés régionaux aux États‐Unis tout en conservant une analyse générale du marché mondial. Dans le présent article, nous décrivons la structure du module du secteur forestier aux États‐Unis par rapport au modéle mondial du secteur forestier et présentons des prévisions formulées d’aprés des scénarios élaborés par le Groupe d’experts intergouvernemental sur lévolution du climat (GIEC) et renfermant des hypothéses long terme sur l’activitééconomique, la croissance de la population et la demande de bois énergie. Nos résultats indiquent que les prix réels du bois rond industriel risquent d’augmenter en raison de la croissance substantielle de la demande mondiale de bois énergie. Cette croissance aurait des répercussions sur les avantages comparatifs des producteurs américains par rapport aux producteurs étrangers, mais les producteurs américains obtiendraient certains avantages comparatifs et une hausse des exportations nettes dans les scénarios ou̇ les prix moyens du bois rond industriel étranger augmenteraient par rapport aux prix observés aux États‐Unis. Ces résultats autorisent ȧ penser que les politiques nationales en matiére de bois énergie devraient examiner de quelle façon les tendances sur les marchés forestiers mondiaux influencent l’utilisation du bois énergie sur les marchés forestiers intérieurs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations20
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207