Current issue: 58(4)
The valuation of forest land for financial accounting purposes is usually performed only when using methods that are based on wood resources. In the yield based methods, the book value of forest land and wood resources form one totality. In the first case, forest land in a separate land account usually has same value in the beginning and end of the accounting year. For instance, the costs of forest improvement are considered capital costs. Forest land can be valued either by multiplying the average hectare price of land with the hectares, or using separate unit prices for the different forest site types. Different ways to value forest land are presented, comparing the forest site type classification developed in Finland and the traditional method based on average height of the trees used in Central Europe. The study shows that values of forest land has relative nature.
The PDF includes a summary in German.
The financial accounting of the forestry needs redefining in Finland due to the effect of forest improvement, especially peatland drainage, on timber balance and valuation of forest land. The aim of the study was to develop methods to determine the timber balance using a separate forest land account. The problems of timber balance are related to the technical methods to assess timber balance and the cost of the work, quantitative determination of the profit, and qualitative determination of the profit. One main problem is to whether to define the quantitative profit as a sustainability of timber resources or difference in the allowable cut and outturn. The article discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the methods, and concludes that regardless of the method that is used to calculate the timber balance, profit or loss accounts have less exact nature in forestry than in other sectors. Replacing reliably calculated revenue surplus with operating result based on timber account would lead to tentative results.
The PDF includes a summary in German.