Combining backcasting with forest sector projection models to provide paths into the future bio-economy

References

• Bergsaker E, editor. 2014. Challenges and possible measures for revitalizing the Norwegian forest sector [Utfordringer og mulige tiltak for revitalisering av skognæringen i Norge]. Oslo: NORSKOG. (NORSKOG-report 2014-1).
   Google Scholar
• Bergseng E, Eid T, Løken Ø, Astrup R. 2013. Harvest residue potential in Norway – a bio-economic model appraisal. Scand J For Res. 28:470–480. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2013.766259
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blingsmo KR, Veidahl A. 1992. Functions for gross price of standing spruce and pine trees. Ås: Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research (Rapp. Skogforsk 8/92:1–24).
   Google Scholar
• Bye T. 2003. On the Price and volume effects from green certificates in the energy market [Internet]. Oslo: Statistics Norway (Discussion Papers No. 351). [cited 2016 Mar 16] Available from: http://www.ssb.no/a/publikasjoner/pdf/DP/dp351.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bye T, Amundsen ES. 2012. Green and white certificates mixed with black [Grønne og hvite sertifikater iblandet sort] [Internet]. Oslo: Statistics Norway (Økonomiske analyser 3/2012). [cited 2016 Mar 16] Available from: http://www.ssb.no/a/publikasjoner/pdf/oa_201203/bye.pdf
   Google Scholar
• CEPI. 2015. Key Statistics 2014. European Pulp and Paper Industry [Internet]. Brussels: CEPI. [cited 2016 Jan 3]. Available from: http://www.cepi.org/system/files/public/documents/publications/statistics/2015/Key%20Statistics%202014%20FINAL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Chas-Amil ML, Buongiorno J. 2000. The demand for paper and paperboard: econometric models for the European Union. Appl Econ. 32:987–999. doi: 10.1080/000368400322048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cuhls K. 2003. From forecasting to foresight processes – new participative foresight activities in Germany. J Forecast. 22:93–111. doi: 10.1002/for.848
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damvad. 2012. The Norwegian pulp and paper industry: new challenges [Internet]. Oslo: Damvad. [cited 2016 Mar 16] Available from: http://www.innovasjonnorge.no/PageFiles/468689/damvad__2012__norsk_treforedlingsindustri.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Guers K, van Wee B. 2000. Backcasting as a tool to develop a sustainable transport scenario assuming emission reductions of 80–90%. Innov Eur J Soc Sci Res. 13:47–62. doi: 10.1080/135116100111658
   Google Scholar
• Heide KM, Holmøy E, Lerskau L, Solli IF. 2004. Macroeconomic properties of the Norwegian applied general equilibrium model MSG6 [Internet]. Oslo: Statistics Norway (Report number 2004/18). [cited 2015 Sep 25] Available from: http://www.ssb.no/nasjonalregnskap-og-konjunkturer/artikler-og-publikasjoner/macroeconomic-properties-of-the-norwegian-applied-general-equilibrium-model-msg6
   Google Scholar
• Hoen HF, Eid T. 1990. A model for analysis of treatment strategies for a forest applying standvice simulations and linear programming. [En modell for analyse av behandlingsalternativer for en skog ved bestandssimulering og lineær programmering]. Ås: Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research (Report of Norwegian Forest Research Institute 9/90)
   Google Scholar
• Höjer M, Mattsson L-G. 2000. Determinism and backcasting in future studies. Futures. 32:613–634. doi: 10.1016/S0016-3287(00)00012-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hovi IB, Madslien A, Sjølie H, Solberg B, Trømborg E, Veisten K. 2011. Impacts of combining partial and general equilibrium modelling in freight transport analyses – a forest sector case study from Norway. Transp Plan Technol. 34:259–275. doi: 10.1080/03081060.2011.565182
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurmekoski E, Hetemäki L. 2013. Studying the future of the forest sector: review and implications for long-term outlook studies. For Policy Econ. 34:17–29. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Energy Agency. 2008. World energy outlook 2008. Paris: International Energy Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Kovacs B, editor. 2015. Sustainable agriculture, forestry and fisheries in the bioeconomy – a challenge for Europe. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Martin BR. 1995. Foresight in science and technology. Technol Anal Strateg Manag. 7:139–168. doi: 10.1080/09537329508524202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDowall W, Eames M. 2006. Forecasts, scenarios, visions, backcasts and roadmaps to the hydrogen economy: a review of the hydrogen futures literature. Energy Policy. 34:1236–1250. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2005.12.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moiseyev A, Solberg B, Kallio AMI. 2013. Wood biomass use for energy in Europe under different assumptions of coal, gas and CO2 emission prices and market conditions. J For Econ. 19:432–449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moiseyev A, Solberg B, Kallio AMI, Lindner M. 2011. An economic analysis of the potential contribution of forest biomass to the EU RES target and its implications for the EU forest industries. J For Econ. 17:197–213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NordReg. 2014. Nordic Market Report 2014. Development in the Nordic electricity market [Internet]. Eskilstuna: Nordic Energy Regulators. [cited 2016 Mar 16] Available from: http://www.nordicenergyregulators.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Nordic-Market-Report-2014.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Norges Bank. 2016. Exchange rates [Internet]. [cited 2016 Mar 25]. Available from: http://www.norges-bank.no/en/Statistics/exchange_rates/
   Google Scholar
• Norwegian Ministry of Agriculture and Food. 2013. Commission for the strategy group Skog22 [Mandat for strategigruppen Skog22] [Internet]. [cited 2016 Mar 16] Available from: https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/lmd/vedlegg/div/mandat_for_strategigruppen_skog22.pdf?id=2187377
   Google Scholar
• Norwegian Ministry of Finance. 2013. The prospective report [Perspektivmeldingen] [Internet]. Oslo: Norwegian Ministry of Finance.
   Google Scholar
• Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy. 2002. Ch. 7 The power market. In: Facts 2004 the energy sector and water resources in Norway [Internet]. Oslo: Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy. Available from: https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/Facts-2004-The-energy-sector-and-water-resources-in-Norway/id419391/
   Google Scholar
• Pelli P. 2008. Review on forest sector foresight studies and exercises. Joensuu: European Forest Institute. EFI Technical Report 29.
   Google Scholar
• Quist J. 2007. Backcasting for a sustainable future the impact after 10 years. Delft: Eburon Academic Pubslihers.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson JB. 1982. Energy backcasting a proposed method of policy analysis. Energ Policy. 10:337–344. doi: 10.1016/0301-4215(82)90048-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg E, Espegren KA, Fidje A, Finden P. 2009. Energy scenario analyses Enova-IFE [Energiscenarioanalyser Enova-IFE] [Internet]. Halden: Institute for Energy Technology. Report number IFE/KR/E-2009/006.
   Google Scholar
• Samuelson PA. 1952. Spatial price equilibrium and linear programming. Am Econ Rev. 42:283–303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simangunsong BCH, Buongiorno J. 2001. International demand equations for forest products: a comparison of methods. Scand J For Res. 16:155–172. doi: 10.1080/028275801300088242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjølie HK, Latta GS, Adams DM, Solberg B. 2011. Impacts of agent information assumptions in forest sector modeling. J For Econ. 17:169–184.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjølie HK, Latta GS, Gobakken T, Solberg B. 2011. NorFor – a forest sector model of Norway. Model overview and structure. Ås: Department of Ecology and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences. INA report 18.
   Google Scholar
• Sjølie HK, Latta GS, Solberg B. 2013a. Dual discounting in climate change mitigation in the forest sector. J For Econ. 19:416–431.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjølie HK, Latta GS, Solberg B. 2013b. Potential impact of albedo incorporation in boreal forest sector climate change policy effectiveness. Clim Policy. 13:665–679. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2013.786302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjølie HK, Latta GS, Solberg B. 2013c. Potentials and costs of climate change mitigation in the Norwegian forest sector – does choice of policy matter? Can J For Res. 43:589–598. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2012-0457
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjølie HK, Latta GS, Solberg B. 2014. Impacts of the Kyoto protocol on boreal forest climate change mitigation. Ann For Sci. 71:267–277. doi: 10.1007/s13595-013-0289-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjølie HK, Latta GS, Trømborg E, Bolkesjø TF, Solberg B. 2015. An assessment of forest sector modeling approaches: conceptual differences and quantitative comparison. Scand J For Res. 30:60–72. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2014.999822
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solberg B, Hetemäki L, Kallio AMI, Moiseyev A, Sjølie HK. 2014. Impact of forest bioenergy and policies on the forest sector markets in Europe – what do we know? Joenssu: European Forest Institute. EFI Technical Report 89.
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Norway. 2015. Statistics agriculture, forestry, hunting and fishing [Internet]. [cited 2016 Jan 29] Available from: http://ssb.no/en/jord-skog-jakt-og-fiskeri?de=Forestry+
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Norway. 2016. Annual national accounts, 2015 [Internet]. [cited 2016 Jan 3]. Available from: https://www.ssb.no/en/nasjonalregnskap-og-konjunkturer/statistikker/nr
   Google Scholar
• Trømborg E, Sjølie HK. 2011. Data applied in forest sector analyses in the forest sector models NorFor and NTMIII. Ås: Department of Ecology and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences. INA report 17.
   Google Scholar
• Trømborg E, Solberg B. 2010. Forest sector impacts of the increased use of wood in energy production in Norway. For Policy Econ. 12:39–47. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2009.09.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2016. Short-term energy outlook [Internet]. [cited 2016 Mar 16]. Available from: https://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/report/prices.cfm
   Google Scholar
• UNECE/FAO. 2011. The European forest sector outlook study II (EFSOS II) 2010–2030. Genova: United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• UNEP. 2004. Global environment outlook scenario framework: background paper for unep’s third global environment outlook report (GEO-3). Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme.
   Google Scholar
• UNEP/RIVM. 2003. Four scenarios for Europe. Based on UNEP’s third global environment outlook. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme, and National Institute of Public Health and the Environment.
   Google Scholar