Abstract

This cost–benefit analysis compared different strategies for ash recycling in southern Swedish forests, with a special emphasis on the potential to use ash recycling as a measure to ameliorate acidification of soils and surface waters caused by acid deposition. Benefit transfer was used to estimate use values for sport fishing and non-use values in terms of existence values. The results show that the optimal share of acidified forest land that should be treated with ash depends on how optimistic one is about the effect of using ash to restore lakes and streams from acidification. More optimistic assumptions imply that the ash to larger extent should be used to ameliorate acidification. Using the most realistic assumption, given the experiences of forest liming, shows that acidified forest land should not be treated with ash with the aim of restoring lakes and streams from acidification. From a socioeconomic point of view, ash simply does more good as fertilizer on forested organic soils.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.