Quantifying the impacts on biodiversity of policies for carbon sequestration in forests

There is currently a great deal of interest in the use of afforestation (conversion of non-forest land to forest) to reduce atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide. To date, economic analyses have focused on the costs of forest carbon sequestration policies related to foregone profits from agricultural production. No studies have examined additional costs or benefits associated with impacts on biodiversity. The main objective of this paper is to estimate the changes in farmland and forest bird populations that are likely to occur under an afforestation policy. Econometric models of land use are used to simulate the response of private landowners to subsidies for tree planting on agricultural land. We evaluate subsidies that achieve conversion of 10% of the total agricultural land in each of three U.S. states (South Carolina, Maine, and southern Wisconsin). Bird density estimates are derived for 615 species with data from the national Breeding Bird Survey. Percentage changes in agricultural and forest land for each county are applied to county-level estimates of bird densities for farmland and forest birds. Despite considerable spatial variation in agricultural land conversion rates and farmland bird distributions within these states, statewide losses of farmland birds were relatively uniform at 10.8-12.2%. Increases in forest bird populations, however. varied substantially between states: 0.3% in Maine, 2.5% in South Carolina, and 21.8% in southern Wisconsin. Surprisingly, a net loss in total bird populations results in all three states ( - 2.0% in Maine, - 2.3% in South Carolina, and - 1.1% in southern Wisconsin), despite the prevailing wisdom as to bird-rich forests. The loss is due to the coincidence of centers of high farmland bird richness and low forest bird richness with areas economically suited to conversion. Additional gains in forest species may result, however, if afforestation within the economically optimal counties is concentrated to fill in existing forest fragments presently suffering avian losses to edge predators. Our results thus show that assessments of the biological consequences of afforestation for carbon sequestration must consider both current land cover and the distributional patterns of organisms as well as the policy's conversion goal. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.