MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064498139 · doi:10.1139/x05-135

The Sustainable Forestry Initiatives impact on stumpage markets in the US South

2005· article· en· W2064498139 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roger Brown, Daowei Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience Foundation Ireland
KeywordsStumpagePulpwoodSoftwoodAgricultural economicsEconomicsForestryBusinessNatural resource economicsGeographyPulp and paper industryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using survey data and an equilibrium displacement model, we estimate the market and economic impacts of the American Forest and Paper Association's Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) on stumpage markets in the US South. We examine four timber product markets: softwood pulpwood, softwood sawtimber, hardwood pulpwood, and hardwood sawtimber. In each market we calculate changes in producer and consumer welfare using the equilibrium displacement model that accounts for reductions in timber inventories caused by SFI compliance. We find that SFI compliance costs the US South's economy about $36 million annually. SFI-compliant stumpage producers lose more than $33 million each year in producer surplus as a result of SFI compliance, and consumers lose about $12 million annually in consumer surplus due to higher product prices. These costs are offset partially by benefits to nonindustrial private forest producers, non-SFI-compliant industry producers, and public forest producers, who collectively gain about $10 million in producer surplus annually as a result of higher stumpage prices.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations14
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207