ReviewReal options analysis for land use management: Methods, application, and implications for policy
Introduction
New markets and policies are emerging which are exerting transformational pressure on land use (Bryan et al., 2013). Diversification of land use—moving away from production agriculture to multifunctional land uses—has been recognised globally as being important for remediating environmental problems and enhancing the sustainability of food and fibre production (Crossman and Bryan, 2009, Lovell and Johnston, 2008, O'Farrell and Anderson, 2010). Many studies worldwide have examined the financial profitability of alternative land uses and the attractiveness of economic incentives through mechanisms such as payments for ecosystem services and agri-environment schemes (Connor et al., 2008, Hein et al., 2013, Wunder et al., 2008). Carbon forestry (Paterson and Bryan, 2012), biodiversity plantings (Polglase et al., 2013), the production of biofuels (Bryan et al., 2010a, Fischer et al., 2010) and bioenergy (Bryan et al., 2010b, Schneider and McCarl, 2003) feedstock may all potentially provide economically viable alternatives to conventional agriculture under the right policy settings. However, the widespread uptake of these alternatives faces many challenges. Psychological inertia, the sunk cost fallacy (Ross and Staw, 1993), the status quo bias (Burmeister and Schade, 2007), along with other factors have all been invoked to explain the reluctance to change. While the decision to adopt an alternative land use or management regimes involve more than purely economic considerations—financial competitiveness is a key component (Lambin et al., 2001, Lubowski et al., 2006).
Capital budgeting is an established process by which organisations evaluate long term investment decisions, typically in new plant and machinery, new products, and in research and development. Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) analysis is one way of evaluating investments using the concept of time value of money. The value of an investment depends on its propensity to generate cash flow. A measure of DCF—net present value (NPV)—has been used widely to assess investments (Bryan et al., 2008, Harper et al., 2007, Paterson and Bryan, 2012, Walsh et al., 2003). However, NPV often has limited ability to account for the value landholders place on managerial flexibility, or the option to wait for further information in the face of uncertainty and risk (Arya et al., 1998)—important considerations in typical land use investment decisions.
A more recent capital budgeting method—real options analysis (ROA)—has been proposed as a better model for valuing investments and describing investment behaviour in the presence of uncertainty (Isik and Yang, 2004, Schatzki, 2003, Song et al., 2011). ROA is applicable when investment decisions are irreversible and where there is the opportunity to delay decisions until more information is gained (Fenichel et al., 2008). This review examines the use and limitations of DCF techniques in evaluating land use and management decisions. We review the application of ROA to land use management and consider the potential for ROA to provide insights into the response to land use change incentives in uncertain contexts. A simulation based real options model is applied to a land use change problem and the implications for policy makers and land holders are discussed.
Section snippets
Concepts
DCF analysis and the calculation of NPV is a practical and widely used method for evaluating agricultural and other investments (Cocks, 1965, Marra et al., 2003). It is based on a fundamental principle of finance—due to inflation, economic growth and risk, a dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow (Homer and Leibowitz, 2013). In DCF analysis, future income streams are discounted and expressed in present value terms (Johnson and Hope, 2012). NPV is the sum of the discounted annual cash
Concepts
The concept of ROA derives from markets for financial options (Borison, 2005, Mun, 2006b). Financial options in commodity markets are derivative securities that take their value from other financial securities known as the underlying asset. In brief, an option provides the right, but not the obligation, to buy (call option) or sell (put option) an underlying asset at a fixed price by a certain specified time in the future (Chance and Brooks, 2009). There are two primary option exercise styles,
A case study
In order to demonstrate the insight that simulation based real options models can provide, we used a ROA simulation method to analyse how accounting for multiple sources of risk influenced the threshold prices necessary to induce land use change from agriculture to bio-energy feedstock in southern Australia. The risks modelled in this case study are limited to price risk, however the method could be extended to include multiple risk including yields, costs and interest rates using probability
Implications for land use policy and future research
Globally, governments are using public policies to improve environmental outcomes such as greenhouse gas emissions abatement or habitat preservation (Bryan and Crossman, 2013). In an Australian context, several studies have determined the economic viability of forestry under varying carbon price scenarios (Burns et al., 2011, Crossman et al., 2011, Lawson et al., 2008, Polglase et al., 2008a, Polglase et al., 2011, Polglase et al., 2013). DCF analysis used in these studies indicates significant
Conclusion
DCF methods have been widely used to value alternative land uses. DCF methods provide a static analysis that assumes investments are now or never propositions, are reversible, and management remains passive throughout the investment's life. In reality, many investments can be seen as a series of strategic options that unfold over time. Managers often have flexibility in when and how investments are made, and under uncertainty this flexibility can have substantial value. Decisions in land use
Acknowledgements
This work was made possible by the Charles John Everard Scholarship awarded through the University of Adelaide and the support of CSIRO's Agriculture Flagship. The authors would like to thank Dr. Tim Capon and Dr. Andrew Reeson for their suggestions on improving this manuscript. The authors would also like to thank the three anonymous reviewers for their time and valuable suggestions which have improved the manuscript markedly.
References (135)
- et al.
Arithmetic Brownian motion and real options
Eur. J. Oper. Res.
(2012) - et al.
A preliminary whole-farm economic analysis of perennial wheat in an Australian dryland farming system
Agric. Syst.
(2008) Options: a Monte Carlo approach
J. Financ. Econ.
(1977)- et al.
An improved simulation method for pricing high-dimensional American derivatives
Math. Comput. Simul.
(2003) - et al.
Pricing American-style securities using simulation
J. Econ. Dyn. Control
(1997) High-performance computing tools for the integrated assessment and modelling of social–ecological systems
Environ. Model. Softw.
(2013)- et al.
Impact of multiple interacting financial incentives on land use change and the supply of ecosystem services
Ecosyst. Serv.
(2013) - et al.
An assessment of the economic and environmental potential of biomass production in an agricultural region
Land Use Policy
(2008) - et al.
Potential of woody biomass production for motivating widespread natural resource management under climate change
Land Use Policy
(2010) - et al.
The second industrial transformation of Australian landscapes
Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.
(2013)
Are entrepreneurs' decisions more biased? An experimental investigation of the susceptibility to status quo bias
J. Bus. Ventur.
Conservation organizations and the option value to preserve: an application to debt-for-nature swaps
Ecol. Econ.
Wilderness: options to preserve, extract, or develop
Resour. Energy Econ.
When to drill? Trigger prices for the arctic national wildlife refuge
Resour. Energy Econ.
The valuation of multidimensional American real options using the LSM simulation method
Comput. Oper. Res.
Option pricing: a simplified approach
J. Financ. Econ.
Identifying cost-effective hotspots for restoring natural capital and enhancing landscape multifunctionality
Ecol. Econ.
Role and value of including lucerne (Medicago sativa) phases in crop rotations for the management of herbicide-resistant (Lolium rigidum) in Western Australia
Crop Prot.
Application of real options theory to forestry investment analysis
For. Policy Econ.
Biofuel production potentials in Europe: sustainable use of cultivated land and pastures, Part II: land use scenarios
Biomass Bioenergy
Real options in the forest: what if prices are mean-reverting?
For. Policy Econ.
The potential of greenhouse sinks to underwrite improved land management
Ecol. Eng.
Payments for ecosystem services and the financing of global biodiversity conservation
Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.
Burrowing bird's decline driven by EIA over-use
Resour. Policy
A real options approach to the valuation of a forestry investment
J. Environ. Econ. Manag.
Species preservation and biodiversity value: a real options approach
J. Environ. Econ. Manag.
A review of soil erosion potential associated with biomass crops
Biomass Bioenergy
The causes of land-use and land-cover change: moving beyond the myths
Glob. Environ. Change
Challenges to the practical implementation of modeling and valuing real options
Quat. Rev. Econ. Financ.
Land-use change and carbon sinks: econometric estimation of the carbon sequestration supply function
J. Environ. Econ. Manag.
The economics of risk, uncertainty and learning in the adoption of new agricultural technologies: where are we on the learning curve?
Agric. Syst.
Scenarios, real options and integrated risk management
Long. Range Plan.
Growing short rotation coppice on agricultural land in Germany: a real options approach
Biomass Bioenerg.
Determinants of corporate borrowing
J. Financ. Econ.
Genetically modified crops as real options: identifying regional and country-specific differences
Int. J. Ind. Organ.
Placing the power of real options analysis into the hands of natural resource managers–taking the next step
J. Environ. Manag.
Sustainable multifunctional landscapes: a review to implementation
Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.
What is not a real option: considering boundaries for the application of real options to business strategy
Acad. Manag. Rev.
Real Options: a Practitioner's Guide
Environmental preservation, uncertainty, and irreversibility
Quat. J. Econ.
Capital budgeting: some exceptions to the net present value rule
Issues Account. Educ.
Capital Budgeting Valuation: Financial Analysis for Today's Investment Projects
Scale of biomass production from new woody crops for salinity control in dryland agriculture in Australia
Int. J. Glob. Energy Issues
Bringing the real world into economic analyses of land use value: incorporating spatial complexity
Land Use Policy
Cost-effectiveness of dryland forest restoration evaluated by spatial analysis of ecosystem services
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
Real options analysis: where are the emperor's clothes?
J. Appl. Corp. Financ.
A stochastic mesh method for pricing high-dimensional American options
J. Comput. Financ.
Agricultural commodity mapping for land use change assessment and environmental management: an application in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia
J. Land Use Sci.
Biofuels agriculture: landscape-scale trade-offs between fuel, economics, carbon, energy, food, and fiber
GCB Bioenerg.
Abatement Potential from Reforestation under Selected Carbon Price Scenarios
Cited by (61)
Regional feed-in tariff mechanism for photovoltaic power generation in China considering tradable green certificate revenue
2024, Journal of Cleaner ProductionOptimal harvest decisions for the management of carbon sequestration forests under price uncertainty and risk preferences
2023, Forest Policy and EconomicsA framework for urban land use classification by integrating the spatial context of points of interest and graph convolutional neural network method
2022, Computers, Environment and Urban SystemsCitation Excerpt :Urban land-use classification information plays an essential role in a wide variety of urban plans and developments (Hayashi & Roy, 2013; Regan et al., 2015; Williamson, Enemark, Wallace, & Rajabifard, 2011; Yin et al., 2011).
Flexible conservation decisions for climate adaptation
2022, One EarthUnderstanding the economic barriers to the adoption of agroforestry: A Real Options analysis
2022, Journal of Environmental Management