Evaluating Four Scenarios

Evaluating Four Scenarios

Four Scenarios:

    Although the system WOW was designed to allow decision makers to construct their own scenarios, four scenarios were predesigned. Everyone is welcome to evaluate them and decide which is the best. The goal of this exercise is twofold.

    First, we would like to test the system design and implementation and receive feedback. Second, because fuelwood is one of the main driving factors in degrading panda habitat and its use for household energy is still an issue in the reserve (and worldwide), we would like to examine whether thinning forest plantations provides a sustainable energy source to rural households.

    Scenario A (Scenario ID 23) represents a situation without the Natural Forest Conservation Program (NFCP) and the Grain-to-Green Program (GTGP). Note that the NFCP and GTGP have played a very important role in encouraging the rural households to switch from fuelwood to electricity. However, it is not likely that the government will continue the programs forever. They are currently scheduled to end in the 2010s. Without a stable income (e.g., from ecotourism, agriculture), farmers will not likely be able to buy electricity even if it is available after the programs stop their subsidies to the households. In such a case, they will return to cutting trees for fuelwood, which is "free" and their traditional energy source.

    Scenario B (Scenario ID 24) simulates the case with the current NFCP and GTGP having been in place since 2000. It was estimated that 60~80% of energy needed for cooking human food and about 30~40% of the energy needed for heating in winters was switched from fuelwood to electricity (Chen et al, unpublished data). Another notable change is that a number of households, especially those located in lower elevations such as Gengda Township, feed their pigs with uncooked fodder with periods that vary from 2 months to a whole year. This accounts for a reduction of 20~30% of the fuelwood for cooking livestock fodder (Chen et al, unpublished data). Thus, averages of 70%, 35%, and 25% of fuelwood demands for each household for cooking, heating and breeding pigs, respectively are satisfied by electricity consumption.

   Scenario C (Scenario ID 25): In this scenario, we consider that fuelwood is a traditional and renewable fuelwood source, which has been used for long time in the reserve, then propose to harvest forest plantations (967 ha) instead of natural forests for fuelwood. The goal is to examine the impact of this proposal on the fuelwood consumption if the NFCP and GTGP continue as in Scenario B. The conservative thinning schema applied has a thinning cycle of 1 year, a thinning intensity of 3%, and starts when the plantations are 10 years old.

    Scenario D (Scenario ID 29) assumes that the NFCP and GTGP continue with stronger (economic) support and will encourage households to consume more electricity. The scenario also assumes that the probability of switching to electricity from fuelwood for cooking, heating and breeding pigs is 90%, 65%, and 35%, respectively. The current rates are 70%, 35%, and 25%, respectively, as used in Scenarios B and C. It still considers the proposal in Scenario C to examine whether thinning forest plantations can offset the remaining fuelwood needs and when it will happen if possible.

Model parameters for the four scenarios are shown below and you can examine them by logging into WOW. The numbers highlighted in red indicate changes compared to the scenario in the left column.

Scenario Simulation Results

Demographic parameters for the four scenarios are not changed and it is expected that the total population and the total number of households will increase steadily. By 2016, the total population would have increased by almost 20% since the simulation starting point in 1996, and the number of households would have increased much faster (50%).

Scenario A: Among the four scenarios, this one yields households that need the most fuelwood and buy the least electricity. The negative impact on panda habitat is the biggest.

Some possible impacts not simulated in WOW are:

Rural households continue to consume fuelwood and thus can maintain their traditional lifestyle; for example,eating smoke-dried pork (bacon).
Some people may think that it is more comfortable to heat the house with fuelwood rather than electricity in winter.
Women may have some health issues because most of them cook for household members and pigs.
Without being introduced to new policies such as the NFCP and GTGP, local communities may not see need to change.
Governments do not need to provide a substantial amount of financial support for programs like NFCP and GTGP.

Scenario B: Households decrease fuelwood demand by 20-30%. However, electricity expense almost doubles. The major contributions of electricity cost are the increase of unit electricity price from 0.08-0.10 RMB to 0.18 RMB and the increase in the amount of electricity consumed. Because households cannot buy electricity to meet all their energy needs and still have to collect fuelwood, the impacted area is similar to that in Scenario A. The minimum collecting area is a 30 m x 30 m pixel. As the fuelwood need is reduced by 20-30%, relatively more forests will be unharvested and the impact on panda habitat may be smaller.

Some possible impacts not simulated in WOW are:

Rural households continue to consume some fuelwood and thus may still maintain some of their traditional lifestyle.
With less fuelwood available and the high cost of electricity, people may sacrifice their welfare by adjusting their energy use, such as reducing the time they heat their houses in winter.
With less fuelwood available and the high cost of electricity, people may change how they cook pigs' fodder, which may have some impacts on their traditional lifestyle, such as consuming less smoke-dried pork (bacon).
Women may gain some health benefits because they use less fuelwood.
As the NFCP strictly enforces fuelwood collection policies, households may spend more time and labor collecting the same amount of fuelwood. The reason may be that people have to go further and collect dead trees/branches, which were not used as fuelwood before.
Collecting dead trees/branches instead big trees for fuelwood may have less impact on panda habitat.
With subsidies from the GTGP and NFCP, households find more cash for other uses, such as, education, health, or entertainment. The subsidies are not designed to be spent on electricity.
Governments need to provide a substantial amount of financial support for programs like the NFCP and GTGP.

Scenario C: As time goes on, thinning forest plantations can provide more and more fuelwood, from 25% to 90% of the total demand. The negatively impacted areas of highly suitable and moderately suitable panda habitat are gradually decreasing.

Compared to Scenario B, some possible impacts not simulated in WOW are:

Because most of forest plantations are close to households, people may spend less time collecting fuelwood
If thinning forest plantations for fuelwood is legal, people may have less psychological pressures than when they have to collect fuelwood illegally.

Scenario D: After the year 2004, this scenario can provide enough fuelwood from thinning forest plantations to meet the lower fuelwood demand. Thus, no natural forests will be destroyed and no panda habitat will be affected. Roughly 1 Km² of panda habitat will be saved yearly. However, households have to pay 50% more for electricity compared to Scenarios B and C.

Compared to Scenario C, some possible impacts not simulated in WOW are:

Governments need to provide a stronger financial support for programs like the NFCP and GTGP to encourage households to use more electricity.

In summary:With a relatively low fuelwood production from the 967 ha forest plantations (most are Japanese larch), a large portion or all of fuelwood demands from rural households can be met, if the NFCP and GTGP continue. Several measures can increase the fuelwood production, such as planting more fuelwood-specific species after thinning or increasing acreage of forest plantations for fuelwood (There are still 20.8 ha of non-forested land suitable for forests and 362.8 ha of shrub land). Combined with other measures of increasing the efficiency of fuelwood use and consuming more electricity, forest plantations for fuelwood can play an important role in an integrated sustainable energy solution for rural households in the reserve. This solution should focus on decreasing fuelwood demand, increasing the efficiency of fuelwood use, increasing fuewlood production, encouraging electricity use, lowering economic costs, and minimizing social conflicts in order to save wildlife habitat and conserve biodiversity.

Evaluating Scenarios:

First, define your preference weights for ecological, economic, and social criteria.
Second, score the four scenarios based on their preformance with respect to the three criteria.
Third, review the ranks of the scenarios.

For instructions on how to evaluate scenarios, please click the help link: How to use WOW.

Links: