Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 1, Issue 1, pp 83–95 | Cite as

Another reconciliation between economists and forestry experts: OLG-arguments

  • Karl-Gustaf Löfgren


Foresters often claim that the goal of good forest policy is to have a sustained forest yield, or even a maximum sustainable yield. They also claim that people wish to save a few extra trees for their children. This bequest motive is not modelled in the standard approach to the optimal rotation problem. In this paper, we present a standard version of an overlapping generation model augmented with a simple tree technology. We show in particular that the market equilibrium can be dynamically inefficient, and that a bequest motive in terms of trees can correct for the overaccumulation of capital that causes the inefficiency. The bequest motive also enables us to account for a harvesting intensity varying with age (young people typically cut more than elderly people) in spite of a perfect capital market.

The crux of the argument is that a bequest motive is likely to increase the equilibrium interest rate and move the economy away from a maximum sustainable yield policy. It, however, improves efficiency and is able to explain empirical regularities that are not easily explained by a traditional perfect capital market approach to forestry.

Key words

Sustained forest yield optimal rotation overlapping generations bequest motive 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allais, M. (1947), Economie et intérêt, Paris: Imprimerie Nationale.Google Scholar
  2. Balasko, Y., Cass, D., and Shell, K. (1980), ‘Existence of Competitive Equilibrium in a General Overlapping-Generation Model’, Journal of Economic Theory, 23, 307–322.Google Scholar
  3. Blanchard, O. (1985), ‘Debt, Deficit, and Finite Horizons’, Journal of Political Economy 93, 223–247.Google Scholar
  4. Blanchard, O. and Fischer, S. (1989), Lectures on Macroeconomics, Cambridge, MIT-Press.Google Scholar
  5. Binkeley, C. (1981), Timber Supply from Private Foresters, Bulletin No. 92, Yale University: School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, New Haven.Google Scholar
  6. Cass, D. C. (1972), ‘On Capital Overaccumulation in the Aggregate Neoclassical Model of Economic Growth: A Complete Characterization’, Journal of Economic Theory 4, 200–223.Google Scholar
  7. Carlén, O. and Löfgren, K. G. (1986), ‘Supply Consequences of Subsidizing Thinning Activities in Sweden’, Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 1, 379–386.Google Scholar
  8. Diamond, P. (1965), ‘National Debt in a Neoclassical Growth Model’, American Economic Review 55, 1126–1150.Google Scholar
  9. Grandmont, J. P. (1985), ‘On Endogenous Business Cycles’, Econometrica 53, 995–1045.Google Scholar
  10. Johansson, P. O. and Löfgren, K. G. (1985), The Economics of Forestry and Natural Resources, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Kemp, M. C. and Long, N. V. (1980), ‘The Underexploitation of Natural Resources: A Model with Overlapping Generations’, in: M. C. Kemp and N. V. Long (eds.) Exhaustible Resources, Optimality and Trade, North-Holland.Google Scholar
  12. Kuuluvainen, J. (1989), Nonindustrial Private Timber Supply and Credit Rationing: Microeconomic Foundations with Empirical Evidence from the Finish Case. Report 85, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Forest Economics.Google Scholar
  13. Mäler, K. G. (1989), Sustainable Development, The Stockholm School of Economics, mimeographed.Google Scholar
  14. Samuelson, P. A. (1958), ‘An Exact Consumption — Loan Model of Interest Rate with or without the Social Contrivance of Money’, Journal of Political Economy 66, 467–482.Google Scholar
  15. Samuelson, P. A. (1976), ‘Economics of Forestry in an Evolving Society’, Economic Inquiry 12, 466–492.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karl-Gustaf Löfgren
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUmeå UniversityUmeåSweden

Personalised recommendations