Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp 173–198 | Cite as

An Operative Framework for Total Hicksian Income Measurement: Application to a Multiple-Use Forest

  • Alejandro Caparrós
  • Pablo Campos
  • Gregorio Montero


A methodology for estimating total hicksian income in multiple-use forests is presented. The approach consistently incorporates commercial as well as non-commercial economic values and enables the measurement of national accounting aggregates taking into account variation in man-made and natural capital. Innovative solutions are developed (i) for the estimation of non-market values, such as recreation, where an attempt to determine exchange values has been made simulating markets, (ii) for timber, where standing timber valuation methods have been extended to cover uneven stands, and (iii) for carbon fixation valuation, where only permanently fixed carbon after 1990 has been taken into account. The methodology is applied to a multiple-use pinewood in the Guadarrama mountains, near Madrid (Spain). Timber, cattle grazing, hunting, recreation, carbon fixation and conservation values are measured and integrated in the accounting system, using primary microeconomic data from the case study. Results indicate the importance of non-commercial income, which accounts for 51% of the total income, and the social relevance of the analysed forest, implying that only 31% of the total income generated is appropriated by the forest owner.

contingent valuation exchange values green national accounting hicksian income 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aronsson, T., P.-O. Johansson and K.-G. Löfgren (1997), Welfare Measurement, Sustainability and Green National Accounting: A Growth Theoretical Approach. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  2. Bergen, V. (1998), ‘Forestry as Part of National Accounts’, in Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), ed., Accounting and Managerial Economics for Environmentally-Friendly Forestry. Actes et Communications n? 15. Versailles: INRA.Google Scholar
  3. Cameron, T. A. (1988), ‘A New Paradigm for Valuing Non-market Goods Using Referendum Data: Maximum Likelihood Estimation by Censored Logistic Regression’, Journal of Environemntal Economics and Management 15, 355-379.Google Scholar
  4. Cameron, T. A. and J. Quiggin (1994), ‘Estimation Using Contingent Valuation Data from a "Dichotomous Choice with Follow-Up" Questionnaire’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 27, 218-234.Google Scholar
  5. Campos, P. (1999a), ‘Un sistema de cuentas microeconómicas del uso mÚltiple de un espacio natural de interés ambiental’, in J. M. Casado and D. Azqueta, eds., Lecturas de economía y medio ambiente. Madrid: Consejo de Colegios de Economistas de España.Google Scholar
  6. Campos, P. (1999b), ‘Hacia la medición de la renta de bienestar del uso mÚltiple de un bosque’, Investigación Agraria: Sistemas y Recursos Forestales 2, 407-422.Google Scholar
  7. Campos, P. and A. Caparrós (1999), ‘Análisis económico de la fijación de carbono por el pino silvestre’, in F. Hernández, ed., El Calentamiento Global en España: un análisis de sus efectos económicos y ambientales. Madrid: CSIC.Google Scholar
  8. Caparrós, A. and P. Campos (2002, forthcoming), ‘Valoración de los usos recreativo y paisajístico en los pinares de la sierra de Guadarrama’, Revista Española de Estudios Agrosociales y Pesqueros 195, 121-146.Google Scholar
  9. Dasgupta, P. and K. G. Mäler (1999), Net National Product and Social Well-Being, Working Paper 125. Stockholm: Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics.Google Scholar
  10. Eisner, R. (1988), ‘Extended Accounts for National Income and Product’, Journal of Economic Literature 26, 1611-1684.Google Scholar
  11. Eurostat (1996), European System of Accounts: ESA-95. Brussels-Luxembourg: ECSC-EC-EAEC.Google Scholar
  12. Eurostat (1997), Manual on Economic Accounts for Agriculture and Forestry (Rev. 1). Luxembourg: European Communties.Google Scholar
  13. Eurostat (1999), The European Framework for Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting for Forests: Results of Pilot Applications. Luxembourg: European Communities.Google Scholar
  14. Eurostat (2000), The European Framework for Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting for Forests (IEEAF). Luxembourg: European Communities.Google Scholar
  15. Gutow, S. and H. Schröder (2000), Die Forstwirtschaft im Volkswirtschaftlichen Rechnungswesen. Frankfurt: Sauerländer Verlag.Google Scholar
  16. Haener, M. K. and W. L. Adamowicz (2000), ‘Regional Forest Resource Accounting: A Northern Alberta Case Study’, Canadian Journal of Forest Research 30, 264-273.Google Scholar
  17. Hartwick, J. M. (1990), ‘Natural Resources, National Accounting and Economic Depreciation’, Journal of Public Economics 43, 291-304.Google Scholar
  18. Hicks, J. (1946), Value and capital (second edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Horcajada, F. (1999), Ordenación cinegética en el Valle de El Paular. Memoria 2: diseño de los aprovechamientos en la zona de caza controlada. Las batidas. Madrid: Parque Natural de Pañalara.Google Scholar
  20. Hultkrantz, L. (1992), ‘National Account of Timber and Forest Environmental Services in Sweden’, Environmental and Resource Economics 2: 283-305.Google Scholar
  21. Institut National de La Recherche Agronomique (INRA) (1978), Alimentation des Ruminants. Versailles: INRA.Google Scholar
  22. Inter-Secretariat Working Group on National Accounts (ISWGNA) (1993), System of National Account 1993. Brussels/Luxembourg, New York, Paris, Washington: EC, IMF, OECD, UN and WB.Google Scholar
  23. Kriström, B. (1999), ‘On the Incorporation of Non-market Outputs of Forests into National Accounting Systems’, in C. S. Roper and A. Park, eds., The Living Forest: Non-market Benefits of Forestry. London: The Stationary Office.Google Scholar
  24. Lindahl, E. (1933), ‘The Concept of Income’, in C. Bagge, ed., Economic Essays in Honour of Gustav Cassel. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  25. London Group on Environmental Accounting (LGEA) (2002), System of Environmental and Economic Accounts (SEEA 2000-Draft for Statistical Commission 2002). Avaiable at: www4.statcan.ca/citygrp/london/publicrev/pubrev.htm (May 2002).Google Scholar
  26. Mäler, K. G. (1991), ‘National Accounts and Environmental Resources’, Environmental and Resource Economics 1, 1-15.Google Scholar
  27. Martín, M., M. Espejo, J. Plaza and T. López (1987), ‘Cálculo de la carga ganadera en la dehesa’, in P. Campos and M. Martin, eds., Conservación y desarrollo de las dehesas portuguesas y española. Madrid: Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación.Google Scholar
  28. Merlo, M. and H. Jöbstl (1999), ‘Incorporating Non-market Values into the Accounting Systems of Publicly and Privately-owned Forest Enterprises: An Operative Stepwise Approach’, in C. S. Roper and A. Park, eds., The Living Forest: Non-market Benefits of Forestry. London: The Stationary Office.Google Scholar
  29. Nordhaus, W. D. and E. C. Kokkelenberg, eds. (1999), Nature's Numbers: Expanding the NationalEconomic Accounts to Include the Environment. Washington, D.C.: National Academic Press.Google Scholar
  30. Peyron, J. L. (1998), Élaboration d'un sytème de comptes économiques articulés de la forêt au niveau national. Nancy: ENGREF.Google Scholar
  31. Scott, M. (1990), ‘Extended Accounts for National Income and Product: A Comment’, Journal of Economic Literature 38, 1172-1186.Google Scholar
  32. United Nations (1993), Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  33. Vanoli, A. (1998), ‘Modelling and Accounting Work in National and Environmental Accounts’, in K. Uno and P. Bartelmus, eds., Environmental Accounting in Theory and in Practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  34. Vincent, J. R. (1999), ‘A Framework for Forest Accounting’, Forest Science 45(4), 552-561.Google Scholar
  35. Weitzman, M. L. (1976), ‘On the Welfare Significance of National Product in a Dynamic Economy’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 90, 156-162.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alejandro Caparrós
    • 1
  • Pablo Campos
    • 2
  • Gregorio Montero
    • 3
  1. 1.Centre International de Recherche sur l'Environnement et le Développement (CIRED)Nogent-sur-Marne cedexFrance
  2. 2.Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (IEG-CSIC)Instituto de Economía y GeografíaFrance
  3. 3.Centro de Investigación ForestalInstituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria (CIFOR-INIA)France

Personalised recommendations