Cite as: M. Ryan, C. O’Donoghue; 2019; Developing a microsimulation model for farm forestry planting decisions; International Journal of Microsimulation; 12(2); 18–36. doi: 10.34196/ijm.00199
Abstract
There is increasing pressure in Europe to convert land from agriculture to forestry which would enable the sequestration of additional carbon, thereby mitigating agricultural greenhouse gas production. However, there is little or no information available on the drivers of the land use change decision from agriculture to forestry at individual farm level, which is complicated by the inter-temporal nature of the decision. This paper describes a static microsimulation approach which provides a better understanding of the life-cycle relativity of forestry and agricultural incomes, using Ireland as a case-study. The microsimulation methodology allows for the generation of actual and counterfactual forest and agricultural income streams and for other attributes of utility such as long-term wealth and leisure, for the first time. These attributes are then modelled using purpose built forest models and farm microdata from a 30 year longitudinal dataset. The results show the importance of financial drivers but additionally show that wealth and leisure are also important factors in this inter-temporal land use change decision. By facilitating the examination of the distribution of farms across the farming population, the use of a static microsimulation approach allows us to make a considerable contribution to the literature in relation to the underlying drivers of farm afforestation behaviour. In the broader context of Climate Smart Agriculture and the Grand Challenges facing the intensification of agricultural production, these findings have implications for policies that seek to optimize natural resource use.
This article contains 2 figures and 9 tables.
Figures
Figure 1. Timelines of financial, policy and leisure components of the utility associated with the land use change from agriculture to forestryFigure 2. Life-Cycle Pattern of Incomes and Costs by yield class over 1 rotation (2015) for conifer thin (ct) and conifer no thin (cnt) options
Tables
Table 1. Impact of planting on income, land and labour
Proportional change in
Market income
Gross margin
Net margin
Land value
Hours worked
No Forest
−0.1953
−0.1397
−0.25
−0.051
−0.034
Has Forest
−0.1948
−0.11396
−0.246
−0.034
−0.033
Table 2. Proportion of Farms where the Forestry AE is greater than Agriculture AE
Classification
Market income
Gross margin
Net margin
Has Forestry
0
0.527
0.298
0.596
1
0.629
0.454
0.703
Never Plant
0
0.633
0.387
0.658
1
0.538
0.303
0.616
Source: Teagasc National Farm Survey 2012–2015 and Teagasc ForBES/ForSubs Models.
Table 3. Components of Income 2012–2015 by relative AE