Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin
RU EN






Today: 13.05.2025
Home Issues 2015 Year Issue №5 NET PRESENT VALUE AS AN INDICATOR OF ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY IN FORESTRY
  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Bulletin Archive
    • 2025 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
    • 2024 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2023 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2022 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2021 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2020 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2019 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 2018 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
    • 2017 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2016 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2015 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2014 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2013 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2012 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2011 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2010 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2009 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2008 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2007 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
    • 2006 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2005 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2004 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2003 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
    • 2002 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2001 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
    • 2000 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 1999 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 1998 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 1997 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
  • Rating
  • Search
  • News
  • Editorial Board
  • Information for Authors
  • Review Procedure
  • Information for Readers
  • Editor’s Publisher Ethics
  • Contacts
  • Manuscript submission
  • Received articles
  • Accepted articles
  • Subscribe
  • Service Entrance
vestnik.tspu.ru
praxema.tspu.ru
ling.tspu.ru
npo.tspu.ru
edujournal.tspu.ru

TSPU Bulletin is a peer-reviewed open-access scientific journal.

E-LIBRARY (РИНЦ)
Ulrich's Periodicals Directory
Google Scholar
European reference index for the humanities and the social sciences (erih plus)
Search by Author
- Not selected -
  • - Not selected -
Яндекс.Метрика

NET PRESENT VALUE AS AN INDICATOR OF ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY IN FORESTRY

Shalnev Andrej Sergeevich, Degtev Vyacheslav Vasilyevich

Information About Author:

The article explains the use of the net present value for the evaluation of the effectiveness of forest management strategies for specific sites. In Russian practice, this indicator is mainly used for the evaluation of investment projects, but in forestry developed countries such as Finland and Canada for several decades now this index is used to evaluate the effectiveness of management of forest areas and planning for logging and reforestation on them. This is due to the fact that in the forestry sector, as well as in investment projects a great role is played by the factor of time, i. e. flows of revenues and expenses can be considerably spaced apart in time. This means that the use of indicators such as net income, profit, profitability, etc. do not allow to obtain complete information and give distorted results, as the time factor is not taken into account. Using an integrated model of economic evaluation in the context of strategies may also lead to an increase in the volume of selective logging, because their benefits can be assessed more clearly.

Keywords: net present value, forestry, forest income, discounting strategy of forestry, forest planning, harvesting forest plantations

References:

1. Voronkov P. T., Shalnev A. S. Izmenenie tsen na lesnuyu produktsiyu kak indikator razvitiya lesnogo sektora [Change of prices for forest products as an indicator of development of forest sector]. Trudy Sankt-Peterburgskogo nauchno-issledovatel'skogo instituta lesnogo khozyaystva – Papers of the St. Petersburg Research Institute of Forestry, 2013, no. 1, pp. 58–63 (in Russian).

2. Shalnev A. S. Ekonomicheskie podkhody k voprosam kollektivnoy sobstvennosti na resursy (na primere lesov) [Economic approaches to the issues of collective property of resources (example: forest property)]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta – TSPU Bulletin, 2013, no. 12 (140), pp. 52–56 (in Russian).

3. Leskinen P., Hujala T., Tikkanen J., Kainulainen T., Kangas A., Kurttila M., Pykäläinen J. & Leskinen L. Adaptive decision analysis in forest management planning. Forest Science, 2009, no. 55 (2), pp. 95–108.

4. Holopainen M., Mäkinen A., Rasinmäki J., Hyytiäinen K., Bayazidi S., Vastaranta M. & Pietilä I. Uncertainty in Forest Net Present Value Estimations. Forests. 2010, no. 1, pp. 177–193.

5. Nuutinen T. & Kellomäki S. A comparison of three modelling approaches for largescale forest scenario analysis in Finland. Silva Fennica, 2001, no. 35 (3), pp. 299–308.

6. Nuutinen T., Hirvelä H., Hynynen J., Härkönen K., Hökkä H., Korhonen K. T. & Salminen O. The role of peatlands in Finnish wood production – an analysis based on largescale forest scenario modelling. Silva Fennica, 2000, no. 34 (2), pp. 131–153.

7. Faustmann M. Calculation of the value which forest land and immature stands possess for forestry. Journal of Forest Economics, 1849, pp. 7–44.

8. Kopytova A. I. Analiz primeneniya ekonomicheskikh mekhanizmov prirodopol'zovaniya v RF [The analysis of use of economic mechanisms of environmental management in the Russian Federation]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta – TSPU Bulletin, 2012, no. 12 (127), pp. 155–160 (in Russian).

shalnev_a._s._48_51_5_158_2015.pdf ( 380.19 kB ) shalnev_a._s._48_51_5_158_2015.zip ( 373.58 kB )

Issue: 5, 2015

Series of issue: Issue 5

Rubric: SECTORAL ECONOMICS

Pages: 48 — 51

Downloads: 1099

For citation:


© 2025 Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin

Development and support: Network Project Laboratory TSPU