Trade-offs between carbon sequestration, landscape aesthetics and biodiversity in a cost-benefit analysis of land use options in Norway

Keyphrases

• Abandoned Pasture 66%
• Across Spaces 33%
• Afforestation Project 66%
• Agricultural Policy 33%
• Alternative Programs 33%
• Benefit Evaluation 33%
• Biodiversity 33%
• Biodiversity Value 33%
• Carbon Sequestration 100%
• Choice Experiment 33%
• Climate Policy 33%
• Cost Increase 33%
• Cost-benefit Analysis 100%
• Disutility 33%
• Greenhouse Gas 33%
• Hypothetical Bias 33%
• Land Use Options 100%
• Land-use Alternatives 66%
• Landscape Aesthetics 100%
• Landscape Biodiversity 100%
• Landscape Values 33%
• Negative Impact 33%
• Net Present Value 66%
• Net Returns 33%
• Non-pecuniary Benefit 33%
• Non-use Value 33%
• Norway 100%
• Pasture 100%
• Pastureland 33%
• Preference Data 33%
• Rural Households 66%
• Semi-natural 33%
• Social Net 33%
• Urban Households 33%
• Willingness to Pay 66%

Economics, Econometrics and Finance

• Climate Policy 33%
• Cost Benefit Analysis 100%
• Direct Air Capture 100%
• Land Use 100%
• Present Value 66%
• Value Theory 33%
• Willingness to Pay 66%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences

• Afforestation 50%
• Biodiversity 100%
• Carbon Sequestration 100%
• Greenhouse Gas 25%
• Land Use 100%
• Reforestation 50%