Web site(s):

FBRI:
http://www.forestbioproducts.umaine.edu/

Dr. Halog:
http://www.forest.umaine.edu/facstaff/facstaff_pages/halog/index.html


Project description:

Economic development depends on availability and consistent supply of cheap energy. Sustaining the present rate of economic development is becoming difficult due to the dwindling availability of cheap and readily available crude oil. Meanwhile, unintended consequences (global warming, bio-diveristy loss, soil productivity loss etc.) from using carbon intensive fuels are becoming more apparent. These concerns have created a situation conducive to alternative energy research and development.

In the US, transportation sector contributes about one third of total green house gas emissions, more than half of which is imported. This insinuates that if fossil fuels can be replaced by biofuels it can render energy security concerns unimportant vis-à-vis provide clean and green energy for economic development. It is worth emphasizing here that biofuel is the only source of renewable transportation liquid fuel known to us today.

Renewability and carbon neutrality are the two most important characteristics of biofuels. These characteristics, however, are necessary but not sufficient conditions to venture on commercial production. The need of cognizant- and science-based policy is urgent given the global interest in bio-fuels. Today, a large number of research institutions are investigating impacts of biofuels production and uses, and their researches cut across several disciplines (engineering, environmental science, economics, forestry, and genomics). Resource availability, economic feasibility, social acceptability, technological maturity and climate change mitigation possibility are some of the recent research foci related to bio-fuels. Ironically, this huge body of research and development literature is disjointed.

My research at the University of Maine to analyze biofuels supply chain in a holistic manner is a novel approach. This integrated research adopts a systems method to assess energy yield, carbon implications, economic advantages and other upstream and downstream impacts as a result of bio-fuel production from cellulosic feedstock. In short it is a transdisciplinary research that intends to investigate rippling effects of bio-fuels production and uses. My goal is to develop a dynamic system model that can generate important information for sustainable development of bio-fuels supply chain.

The model that I intend to develop consists of several sub-modules that represent social, economic and environmental interests. Subtle yet important interrelationships can be captured in this type of system model. These sub-modules can then be integrated in a larger framework of System Dynamics. Use of System Dynamics would enable us to generate different scenarios that reflect impacts of biofuels production on spatial and temporal scales. A model like this will help to identify unintended consequences early in the development of alternative energy strategies to avoid costly restructuring in the future.

Evolutionary pathways of bioenergy sector, along with immediate and long term effects of biofuels production to society, economy and environment, are some of the critical questions that could be answered using the proposed prototype model. Such a model would contribute to chart low carbon economic policies by enhancing our understanding and knowledge of policies’ impacts on planet, people and profit.

An exploratory assessment of LFLP was conducted in four districts through in-depth interviews with two major stakeholders: (1) Departments of Forest and Livestock Services officials, who administer LFLP, and (2) user groups. The objectives of the study were to assess perceptions of the social, ecological and economic impacts of LFLP from the perspectives of those most intimately involved in program delivery and outcomes. Thirty personal interviews were conducted in the fall of 2007. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using qualitative analysis procedures.

According to study participants, LFLP has contributed to resource regeneration, healthy forest composition, and increased biodiversity in leased forest parcels through controlled grazing, reforestation incentives, and local management. However, mixed reviews of the economic impact of the program were recorded. The collection of rotational funds among user groups has opened avenues of small investments. Yet, study participants blamed inadequate human resources within the Departments for impairing service delivery and depressing the rate of economic return. Furthermore, ambiguous and inconsistently enforced policies around program guideline compliance have engendered conflict over resource access and use. Perhaps the most significant windfall to user groups is not poverty alleviation but rather increased social capital and capacity building among user groups. User group formation has strengthened networks between members in standing against social discrimination, lobbying their rights at the district level, and sharing knowledge. Our findings suggest that benefits attained by user groups are not entirely commensurate with LFLP goals. We recommend further research on the economic impacts of LFLP. In addition, LFLP officials should recognize and bolster investments in social capital among LFLP user groups.