Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 504–513 | Cite as

Is a Clean Development Mechanism project economically justified? Case study of an International Carbon Sequestration Project in Iran

  • Salih Katircioglu
  • Sara Dalir
  • Hossein G. Olya
Research Article


The present study evaluates a carbon sequestration project for the three plant species in arid and semiarid regions of Iran. Results show that Haloxylon performed appropriately in the carbon sequestration process during the 6 years of the International Carbon Sequestration Project (ICSP). In addition to a high degree of carbon dioxide sequestration, Haloxylon shows high compatibility with severe environmental conditions and low maintenance costs. Financial and economic analysis demonstrated that the ICSP was justified from an economic perspective. The financial assessment showed that net present value (NPV) (US$1,098,022.70), internal rate of return (IRR) (21.53 %), and payback period (6 years) were in an acceptable range. The results of the economic analysis suggested an NPV of US$4,407,805.15 and an IRR of 50.63 %. Therefore, results of this study suggest that there are sufficient incentives for investors to participate in such kind of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects.


Clean Development Mechanism Carbon sequestration NPV Iran 


  1. Abdi N, Arefi MH, Amiri ZG (2007) Estimates of carbon sequestration potential of Astragalus Ranges in Markazi province (case study: Malmir area of Shazand City). Iran J Range Desert Res 15(2):269–282Google Scholar
  2. Alizadeh M, Mahdavi M, Jouri MH (2010) Capability investigation of carbon sequestration in two species (Artemisia sieberi Besser and Stipa barbata Desf.) under different treatments of vegetation management (Saveh, Iran). World Acad Sci Eng Technol 46:295–298Google Scholar
  3. Amani M, Arefi MH (2003) Assessment of carbon sequestration potential in Haloxylon forest of the Iran. First conference of Haloxylon plantation, Kerman, Iran (in Persian) Google Scholar
  4. Amiraslani F, Dragovich D (2010) Cross‐sectoral and participatory approaches to combating desertification: the Iranian experience. Nat Res Forum 34(2):140–154. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-8947.2010.01299.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson D (1987) Economic aspects of afforestation and soil conservation projects. Ann Reg Sci 21(3):100–110. doi: 10.1007/BF01287285 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bari MA, Smettem KRJ (2006) A conceptual model of daily water balance following partial clearing from forest to pasture. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 10(3):321–337. doi: 10.5194/hess-10-321-2006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bordbar SK, Jahromi MSM (2006) Evaluation of the potential for carbon storage in forests of eucalyptus and acacia, western province. Pajouhesh and Sazandegi 70:95–103Google Scholar
  8. Cacho OJ (2008) Carbon markets, transaction costs and bioenergy, In 52th Conference of Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, February 5–8 (No. 6007), Canberra, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  9. Campbell HF, Brown RP (2003) Benefit-cost analysis: financial and economic appraisal using spreadsheets. Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7660.2004.00349.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cao S, Wang G, Chen L (2010) Questionable value of planting thirsty trees in dry regions. Nature 465(7294):31–31. doi: 10.1038/465031d CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deo B, Donker H, Schulz M (2012) Carbon credits on private lands in British Columbia. Low Carbon Economy 3:144–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Deodhar V, Michaelowa A, Krey M (2003) Financing structures for CDM projects in India and capacity building options for EU-Indo collaboration, Hamburg Institute of International Economics, HWWA discussion paper 247Google Scholar
  13. Ellis TW, Leguédois S, Hairsine PB, Tongway DJ (2006) Capture of overland flow by a tree belt on a pastured hillslope in south-eastern Australia. Soil Res 44(2):117–125. doi: 10.1071/SR05130 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hassall G (2010) The Commonwealth Local Government Pacific Project: Seeking ‘most significant change’. Com J Loc Gov 0(5). Accessed 21 Apr 2010
  15. ICSP (2009) Annual report of carbon sequestration project forest. Rangelands and Watershed Management Organization, Ministry of Jihad Agriculture, Birjand, IranGoogle Scholar
  16. Jackson RB, Jobbágy EG, Avissar R, Roy SB, Barrett DJ, Cook CW, Farley KA, Le Maitre DC, McCarl BA, Murray BC (2005) Trading water for carbon with biological carbon sequestration. Science 310(5756):1944–1947. doi: 10.1126/science.1119282 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jepkemei BV (2010) Potential economic value of carbon sequestration in Kakamega forest and surrounding farms, Unpublished Msc thesis. Egerton University, KenyaGoogle Scholar
  18. Kavanagh R, Law B, Lemckert F, Stanton M, Chidel M, Brassil T, Towerton A, Herring M (2005) Biodiversity in eucalypt plantings established to reduce salinity. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC), Australia, Publication No. 05/165 Google Scholar
  19. Khamzina A, Lamers JP, Vlek PL (2012) Conversion of degraded cropland to tree plantations for ecosystem and livelihood benefits, Cotton, water, salts and soums, pp. 235–248Google Scholar
  20. Lawson K, Burns K, Low K, Heyhoe E, Ahammad H (2008) Analysing the economic potential of forestry for carbon sequestration under alternative carbon price paths. Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics (ABARE), Canberra, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  21. Loyn R, McNabb E, Macak P, Cheers G (2009) Fauna in eucalypt and pine plantations in the green triangle of south-eastern south Australia and south-western Victoria. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Department of Sustainability and environment, Heidelberg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  22. MacDicken KG (1997) A guide to monitoring carbon storage in forestry and agroforestry projects. Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development, USA, p 87Google Scholar
  23. Newnan DG, Eschenbach TG, Lavelle JP (2004) Engineering economic analysis: study guide. Oxford University Press, United KingdomGoogle Scholar
  24. Paul KI, Reeson A, Polglase PJ, Ritson P (2012) Economic and employment implications of a carbon market for industrial plantations. Land Use Policy 30(1):528–540. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.04.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Paul KI, Reeson A, Polglase P, Crossman N, Freudenberger D, Hawkins C (2013a) Economic and employment implications of a carbon market for integrated farm forestry and biodiverse environmental plantings. Land Use Policy 30(1):496–506. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.04.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Paul KI, Reeson A, Polglase PJ, Ritson P (2013b) Economic and employment implications of a carbon market for industrial plantation forestry. Land Use Policy 30(1):528–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Peckham SD, Gower ST, Buongiorno J (2012) Estimating the carbon budget and maximizing future carbon uptake for a temperate forest region in the US. Carbon Balance Manage 1(7):6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Polglase P, Reeson A, Hawkins C, Paul K, Siggins A, Turner J, Crawford D, Jovanovic T, Hobbs T, Opie K, Almeida A (2011) Opportunities for carbon forestry in Australia: economic assessment and constraints to implementation. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Canberra, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  29. Robinson N, Harper RJ, Smettem KRJ (2006) Soil water depletion by Eucalyptus spp. integrated into dryland agricultural systems. Plant Soil 286(1–2):141–151. doi: 10.1007/s11104-006-9032-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schirmer J (2009) Socioeconomic impacts of the plantation industry on rural communities in Tasmania, Technical Report 199, Cooperative Research for ForestryGoogle Scholar
  31. Sedjo R, Sohngen B (2012) Carbon sequestration in forests and soils. Ann Rev Resour Econ 4(1):127–144. doi: 10.1146/annurev-resource-083110-115941 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tassone VC, Wesseler J, Nesci FS (2004) Diverging incentives for afforestation from carbon sequestration: an economic analysis of the EU afforestation program in the south of Italy. Forest Policy Econ 6(6):567–578. doi: 10.1016/S1389-9341(03)00006-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Townsend PV, Harper RJ, Brennan PD, Dean C, Wu S, Smettem KRJ, Cook SE (2012) Multiple environmental services as an opportunity for watershed restoration. Forest Policy Econ 17:45–58. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2011.06.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Walkley A (1947) A critical examination of a rapid method for determination of organic carbon in soils—effect of variations in digestion conditions and of inorganic soil constituents. Soil Sci 63:251–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Walkley A, Black IA (1934) An examination of Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci 37:29–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wang C, Ouyang H, Maclaren V, Yin Y, Shao B, Boland A, Tian Y (2007) Evaluation of the economic and environmental impact of converting cropland to forest: a case study in Dunhua county, China. J Environ Manag 85(3):746–756. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.04.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wilson SM, Tran YD (1995) Trees on farms. Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics. Farm Surveys Report, Canberra, AustraliaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Salih Katircioglu
    • 1
  • Sara Dalir
    • 2
  • Hossein G. Olya
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Banking and FinanceEastern Mediterranean UniversityFamagustaTurkey
  2. 2.Allameh Tabatabai UniversityTehranIran
  3. 3.Faculty of TourismEastern Mediterranean UniversityFamagustaTurkey

Personalised recommendations