自然资源学报

自然资源学报 ›› 2006, Vol. 21 ›› Issue (4): 661-669.doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2006.04.021

• 研究方法 • 上一篇    下一篇

森林绿色核算中不同林地林木估价方法的比较

张颖, 高淑媛, 杜婷   

  1. 北京林业大学经济与管理学院,北京100083
  • 收稿日期:2005-11-02 修回日期:2006-02-09 出版日期:2006-08-25 发布日期:2006-08-25
  • 作者简介:张颖(1964)男，陕西眉县人，教授，回国博士后，主要从事森林资源、生态环境的价值评价和核算及 区域经济学的教学、研究。E-mail: zhangyin@bjfu.edu.cn:Tel: 010-62338840
  • 基金资助:

    2005年国家社会科学基金项目资助(05BJY045)

Comparison on Evaluation Methods of Forests and Wooded Land in Green Accounting for Forest

ZHANG Ying, GAO Shu-yuan, DU Ting   

  1. School of Economics and Management,Beijing Forestry University,Beijing 100083,China
  • Received:2005-11-02 Revised:2006-02-09 Online:2006-08-25 Published:2006-08-25

PDF (PC)

赞

被引次数

14 | 1

摘要： 在对国内外森林绿色核算中林地林木估价方法综述的基础上指出:林地林木估价起源于森林评价学,已有200多年的历史,且估价方法较多,概括起来主要包括比较方式估价方法、成本方式估价方法、收益方式估价方法和收益比较折衷方式估价方法。幼、中龄林一般采用成本方式估价方法;近熟林、成熟林和过熟林采用收益方式估价方法。联合国等在综合环境经济核算体系中推荐的林地林木估价方法主要为立木价值法、消费价值法和净现值法,虽然与森林评价学上的名称不一致,但属于收益方式的评价方法。文章还分别采用成本法和净现值法对海南省、大兴安岭的林地林木进行了估价,通过估价结果的比较分析认为,成本法可作为林木估价的最低值,净现值法的估价高于成本法的估价,净现值法估价是成本价法估价的1.03～1.14倍。另外,虽然联合国等推荐的林地林木估价首选方法为净现值法,但实际计算需要大量的数据,且无论是立木价值法,还是消费价值法和净现值法估价,其结果差异很大。德国、澳大利亚和法国的研究表明,3种方法的估价结果相差2倍多。欧盟也因此推荐立木价值法估价。文章最后认为,林地林木估价的方法目前还没有达成一致,且不同的估价方法估算的结果也存在明显的差异。

关键词: 森林, 绿色核算, 林地, 林木, 估价

Abstract: Based on the summary of the evaluation methods of forests and wooded land in green accounting for forest in domestic and foreign,this paper indicates that the evaluation of forests and wooded land originated from forest valuation has existed more than 200 years;there are many kinds of methods in forest evaluation,such as comparative valuation method,cost valuation method and benefit valuation method.Cost valuation method is generally used to evaluate young growth and middle-aged forest;benefit valuation method is often used to estimate submature,mature and overmature forest.The evaluation methods of forests and wooded land recommended by the United Nations in the System of Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounts(SEEA)are stumpage value method,consumption value method and net present value method.Although the names of the methods in the SEEA are inconsistent with those in forest valuation,all these methods belong to the benefit valuation method.This paper also separately uses the cost method and net present value method to evaluate the forests and wooded land in Hainan Province and the Greater Hinggan Mountains.Through the comparison and analysis to the results of the valuation,the cost method is believed to be the minimum value of the forest valuation.The result calculated by the net present value method is higher than the one calculated by the cost method and the former is 1.03-1.04 times higher than the latter.Moreover,although the United Nations takes the net present value method as the first choice,actual calculation needs massive data.And the results of the three methods of stumpage value method,consumption value method and net present value method have big difference.Researches carried out in German,Australia and France indicate that there is a discrepancy by about 2 times in the valuation results of the three methods.Finally,the paper points out that there are no common methods to evaluate forests and wooded land at present and different evaluation methods have different results.

Key words: forests, green accounting, wooded land, stand forest, valuation