ArticleHeliyon2023
Comparative analysis of managing plantation forests: The case of keeping plantation forests for carbon credit and industrial profits in Oromia Region, Ethiopia.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- From degradation to restoration: addressing the environmental challenges in the Ethiopian highlands.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Community-based organizations (CBOs) and individuals primarily engaged in forest management dedicated to carbon credit run both at national and regional levels. After a span of time elapsed in the same, CBOs and individuals aspired to shift the carbon-dedicated forest either into log or timber production based on an informed decision. However, there is no study done so which of these projects is financially more useful to them to make an informed decision. The objective of the study is, therefore, to make comparative analyses of plantation forests for carbon credit, round log and timber. The result has revealed that plantation forest managed for timber production is most attractive and rewarding in year 10 and year 15 both with and without discounting at 3%. Plantation forest managed for timber production enables the creation of a fixed asset than both carbon credit and log production. Plantation forests managed for the carbon credit, log production and timber production have externalities both positive and negative which must be considered while calculating the costs and benefits accrued thereof. There are existing and emerging risks associated with the carbon credit project which shifts from natural (forest) to technological abatement of climate change. The study is critical to understanding the benefits of future plantation forest investment. We, thus, conclude forest managed for timber production is financially more useful for CBOs and individuals than round log and carbon credit. We recommend CBOs and individuals to have adequate information on benefits and risks associated with plantation forests managed for carbon credit, round log and timber production before engaging in the investment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.