ABSTRACT
In the late 1970s, then, we were familiar with the various concepts of optimal rotation discussed by Samuelson. We knew which ones would give the longer and which the shorter rotations. Textbooks then current (Petrini, 1951; Hiley, 1956; Gregory, 1972) were familiar with Faustmann’s work, and tended to favour the Faustmann criterion for optimal rotation. (Johnston et al. [1967], however, used a strange hybrid, maximizing the net present value (NPV) of a single rotation, but including the opportunity cost of one successor rotation.) But above all Faustmann’s paper, recently translated, was in front of us, and that sufficed to provide us a definitive answer to what was the most valuable rotation.
