Costs and benefits of forest conservation: regional and local comparisons in Eastern Finland

In addition to environmental interests vs. timber production, debates on forest conservation have typically dealt with nationwide vs. local and regional interests. While most previous studies have focused on the nationwide perspective, this paper considers the benefits and costs of existing conservation areas from the regional and local point of view. The non-market benefits of conservation are measured by means of contingent valuation. Unlike most discrete-choice CV studies, we allow for zero willingness to pay. The results of our cost-benefit analysis suggest that the aggregate benefits of conservation clearly exceed the total opportunity costs when viewed from a regional (or nationwide) perspective, but at the local level costs exceed the benefits of conservation. Differences were also found in locally vs. regionally relevant benefits and costs.     

福建省国有林场营林投资经济效益评价研究

运用净现值法和内部收益率法,用福建省国有林场杉木生产过程中发生所有费用和木材生产过程中发生费用的资料,研究福建省国有林场营林投资经济效益。结果表明:国有林场林业投资有一定的经济效益,但经济效益还是比较低;以6%的资本利率,杉木投资的净现值为178.53元/hm2。林业税费政策调整以后,林业投资收益主要取决于造林抚育的支出水平。     

Estimating the benefits of recreation-oriented management in state-owned commercial forests in Finland: A choice experiment

As forestlands provide a variety of environmental services, the management of forest resources is a matter of public concern. In the present case of state-owned commercial forests in Finland, legislation requires specific management practices to enhance recreational benefits free of charge to the public. This choice experiment considers Finnish people's valuation of the recreation-oriented management of state-owned commercial forests to evaluate whether the recreational benefits produced justify the related loss of profits from timber sales. We focus on three management attributes: scenic buffer zones along lakes and rivers, habitats for game birds, and the quality of scenery as reflected by the frequency of clear-cut areas along hiking trails. Marginal willingness-to-pay (WTP) effects for the attributes are estimated with random parameters logit models specified in the WTP space, while preference-space models are used to estimate in physical terms the attribute levels that maximize the benefits to the public. Despite regional differences in preferences, people in all parts of Finland valued the current recreation-oriented management of state-owned commercial forests considerably. Nationwide, the aggregate benefits of recreation-enhancing management clearly exceeded the estimated opportunity costs. The most preferred levels of management attributes were slightly above the current levels, suggesting an increase in the provision of recreational services when not considering the associated costs.     

基于DEA方法的我国营林生产绩效评价研究

通过数据包络分析方法(DEA),从总体效率、纯技术效率、规模收益和投影分析等方面研究了我国30个省区营林生产的投入产出效率。研究表明:我国营林生产长期投入不足,整体营林生产效率还处于较低的水平;DEA无效省区营林生产规模收益均处于规模效益递增阶段,营林绩效具有较大的提升空间。通过增加营林资本、技术投入与创新管理模式等手段可以有效提升营林生产的效率。     

Economics of carbon sequestration in community forests: Evidence from REDD+ piloting in Nepal

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) has been piloted in developing countries as a climate change mitigation strategy, providing financial incentives for carbon sequestration in forests. This paper examines the economic feasibility of REDD+ in community forests within two watersheds in central Nepal, Ludikhola and Kayarkhola, using data on forest product demand, carbon sequestration, carbon price and REDD+ related costs. The benefits of REDD+ are about $7994, $152, and $64 per community forest, per hectare of forest area, and per household in Ludikhola watershed compared to $4815, $29, and $56 in Kayarkhola watershed, respectively, under the business-as-usual scenario. Compared to the EU ETS carbon price ($10.3/tCO₂e), the average break-even carbon price in community forests is much higher in Kayarkhola watershed ($41.8/tCO₂e) and much lower in Ludikhola watershed ($2.4/tCO₂e) when empirical estimates of annual expenditure in community forests are included in the analysis. The incorporation of annual expenditure estimates and opportunity cost of sequestered carbon (in the form of firewood prices in local markets) in the analysis suggests that community forests are economically infeasible for REDD+ at the prevailing carbon prices. The implication of our findings is that economic feasibility of REDD+ in community forests depends on the local contexts, carbon prices and the opportunity costs, which should be carefully considered in designing REDD+ projects.     

从《关于林木盗窃法的辩论》看马克思的森林立法观

马克思的森林立法观是在批判资产阶级法制的基础上提出的。马克思运用利益分析的方法,揭露了资产阶级森林立法的本质,指出林木所有者的私人利益是资产阶级森林立法的灵魂,林木所有者的私人利益败坏了森林立法的正义品格,从而主张森林立法应以人为本,以社会为本,以公益为重心,坚持普遍联系的思想。     

Analysing foregone costs of communities and carbon benefits in small scale community based forestry practice in Nepal

Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, conservation and sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon (REDD+) are considered to be important cost effective approaches for global climate change mitigation; therefore, such practices are evolving as the REDD+ payment mechanism in developing countries. Using six years (2006–2012) data, this paper analyses trade-offs between carbon stock gains and the costs incurred by communities in generating additional carbon in 105 REDD+ pilot community forests in Nepal. It estimates foregone benefits for communities engaged in increasing carbon stocks in various dominant vegetation types. At recent carbon and commodity prices, communities receive on average US$ 0.47/ha/year of carbon benefits with the additional cost of US$ 67.30/ha/year. One dollar’s worth of community cost resulted 0.23 Mg of carbon sequestration. Therefore, carbon payment alone may not be an attractive incentive within small-scale community forestry and should link with payments for ecosystem services. Moreover, the study found highest community sacrificed benefits in Shorea mixed broadleaf forests and lowest in Schima-Castanopsis forests, while carbon benefits were highest in Pine forests followed by Schima-Castanopsis forests and lowest in Rhododendron-Quercus forests. This indicates that costs and benefits may vary by vegetation type. A policy should consider payment for other environmental services, carbon gains, co-benefits and trade off while designing the REDD+ mechanism in community based forest land use practice with equitable community outcomes. The learning from this study will help in the formulation of an appropriate REDD+ policy for community forestry.     

DO HIGH DISCOUNT RATES DESTROY TROPICAL FORESTS

The short-term viewpoint implicit in high discount rates seems to favour immediate forest exploitation rather than conservation for perpetual benefits. However, the value of logging revenues increases with a lower discount rate, because of the greater weighting given to investible funds. Thus, in several theoretical models, net present value of logging increases as discount rate is lowered. In practice, however, long-term costs of logging may also incur the weighting appropriate to investment funds; reinvestment of logging revenues may not actually take place; and lower discount rates may be appropriate for costs but not revenues. These circumstances favour conservation, the more so at lower discount rates.     

中小林农林权抵押贷款新模式探析

林权抵押贷款作为农村产权改革和农村金融的双重创新,不仅可以盘活森林资源,也可为林业发展提供融通资金。现有林权抵押贷款模式仅适合林业企业和林业大户,针对中小林农的林权抵押贷款模式尚未在理论上进行过系统研究。基于此,文章运用新制度经济学交易成本相关理论,探索适合中小林农的"订单林业+企业担保"的林权抵押贷款新模式,并对必要性、可行性和意义进行分析,提出实施建议。     

重点生态区位商品林生态补偿利益相关者演化博弈研究

根据演化博弈理论,构建动态演化博弈模型,探讨重点生态区位商品林生态补偿过程中各利益主体在有限理性条件下的利益驱动、决策行为和依据以及主体间交互作用下的演化稳定策略,分析在不同情境下影响林农和地方政府演化博弈均衡的因素。研究结果表明:两大博弈主体的策略选择和策略演化方向依赖于初始状态及其演化路径,并与博弈矩阵的参数有关;地方政府的行为决策直接影响生态补偿项目的可持续性;作为项目的直接实施主体,林农的积极性与响应度直接影响生态补偿项目的实施效果。因此,应该建立健全生态补偿,完善生态环境保护激励机制,构建政府主导、林农参与的环境保护工作机制。     

Editorial - Decision rules, government rules, and the costs of vegetation protection in New South Wales

Governments regularly spend public funds to purchase environmental amenities. They might purchase land to add to the public estate, pay to fence stock out of endangered native forest, or offer stewardship payments as incentives to conservation. Governments also regularly introduce policies to achieve environmental goals, even though these policies impose costs on firms, households or farms. The basic decision rule, to maximise environmental benefits from a given budget, in all these cases is received wisdom within the economics profession. In the case of purchase of land to add to the public estate:Maximise environmental benefits by purchasing land in descending order of the ratio of benefit to cost until the budget is exhausted.More generally, funds should be allocated to individual activities within a programme in order of the decreasing ratio of benefits to costs until the budget is exhausted. This rule can be applied when benefits can be measured in any monetary or non-monetary quantitative index. In the case of conservation of vegetation, it can be applied relatively simply in the field when vegetation types and land values can be mapped jointly through GIS techniques.This simple decision rule is not always followed by government agencies that manage environmental programmes. Consider the protection of native vegetation, which is defined to include native forest, native woodland and native grassland. To meet international obligations to protect this kind of environment, most countries must involve private landholders in conservation because there are insufficient government reserves to meet the international commitments. Indeed, most countries have already introduced many policies to encourage private landholders to protect native vegetation on their forests and farms.The New South Wales state government, in Australia, has introduced the Native Vegetation Conservation Act (1998) to ensure that private landholders protect vegetation. The Act constrains farmers to retain all the native forest, native woodland, and native grassland, on their land irrespective of the costs to them. Farmers can then apply for consent to clear and crop this land, but consent is rarely granted in full and often not at all. The Act is consistent with a decision rule of “maximise-benefits-only” - protect all vegetation irrespective of the costs to those who have to conserve it.Constraints of this kind will inevitably lead to a loss of income and land value when they restrict the farm enterprises, and so will impose opportunity costs on the farmer. There is already ample published evidence on the sizes of these costs - from publications of the relevant state agency itself, consultants' reports, farmer submissions and independent research. For example, in a large region in the northwest of New South Wales, where land could be cropped very productively:- some farmers bear only small losses (a quarter lose less than five per cent of their potential income),- some farmers bear very large losses (another quarter lose more than half of their potential income),- the overall losses of income per farm are high (an average loss of almost 30 per cent of potential income across the region), and- the losses are highest for those who have already conserved most woodland.Consider now the problem of reducing these costs by applying the benefit-cost rule as opposed to the maximise-benefits-only rule that has led to this position. There are three economic decision rules that might be used to rank projects or activities.The benefit-cost rule: Impose the constraint on the farm with the highest ratio of environmental benefit per dollar of opportunity cost first, then on the farm with the next highest ratio, etc., until the environmental goal is met. And so maximise the ratio of benefits to opportunity costs.The benefit-only rule: Impose the constraint on the farm with the highest environmental benefits first, then on the farm with the next highest benefits, etc., until the environmental goal is met. And so maximise benefits.The cost-only rule: Impose the constraint on the farm with the lowest opportunity costs first, then the next lowest cost, etc, until the environmental goal is met. And so minimise opportunity costs.But do these rules normally lead to different outcomes? If the “budget” or willingness to impose opportunity costs were large enough, all three would lead to the same outcome because constraints would be imposed on all suitable land. Otherwise the outcomes differ - that is the different rules lead to different levels of environmental benefit from the imposition of a given level of opportunity cost (or from the expenditure of a given budget).Both the benefit-only and cost-only rules lead to inefficiencies (see Babcock et al (1997) and Wu et al (2000) for a discussion of the associated statistical issues). Benefit-only targeting leads to the retirement of highly-productive land from agricultural uses - which is a major reason why opportunity costs are often high when native vegetation is conserved under the Act in New South Wales. The cost-only rule can lead to the reservation or purchase of land with few environmental benefits, even though expenditure or opportunity cost is minimised.A comparison of the benefit-cost rule and the benefit-only rule in the northwest of New South Wales illustrates the problem. The region is potentially highly-productive crop land but large areas of it are presently covered by native forest and woodland which cannot now be cleared. Much of this vegetation is under various degrees of threat even though it is not rare or endangered. The farm is the unit of assessment under the Act, so is used in the example. Benefits are measured as the percentages of species that are saved on each farm when its vegetation is protected rather than cleared to crops. The total benefit is the aggregate of percentage species saved across the farms - again following the present administration of the Act. The opportunity costs are measured as the losses in land value because land cannot now be cleared due to the Act.The comparison of the two rules indicates substantial savings with the benefit-cost rule. For example, 90 per cent of the total benefits can be obtained by imposing 93 per cent of the total opportunity costs with the benefit-only rule, and by imposing only 54 per cent of the total opportunity costs with the benefit-cost rule. The benefit-cost rule saves 39 per cent of the total costs at this level of benefits. Again, 80 cent of the total benefits can be obtained by imposing 86 per cent of the total opportunity costs with the benefit-only rule, but by imposing only 46 per cent of the total opportunity costs with the benefit-cost rule. The benefit-cost rule saves 40 per cent of costs at this level of benefits.While such results can only be indicative of the magnitudes, they do serve to highlight the inefficiencies of decision rules used by government agencies. In New South Wales, the Native Vegetation Conservation Act imposes high opportunity costs on farmers, partly because it is implemented through a high-cost decision rule. Now that suitable GIS technology, vegetation maps, and spatial land value data, are becoming available, these costs can be lowered with a more rational decision rule to guide choices in the field.The environmental goal is not at issue, but the cost of achieving it is. We can identify who bears the opportunity costs of environmental conservation, and often value the magnitude of these costs. Now we can also reduce the levels of these costs with the use of the benefit-cost decision rule.Jack SindenAgricultural and Resource EconomicsUniversity of New EnglandArmidale, New South WalesReferencesBabcock Bruce A, Lackshminarayan PG, Wu JunJie and Silberman D (1997) “Targeting Tools for the Purchase of Environmental Amenities”, Land Economics, 73, 325-339.Wu JunJie, Adams Richard M., Zilberman David, and Bruce Babcock (2000) “Targeting Resource Conservation Expenditures”, Choices, Second Quarter, 2000, 3-8.     

Targeting Incentives to Reduce Habitat Fragmentation

This article develops a theoretical model to analyze the spatial targeting of incentives for the restoration of forested landscapes when wildlife habitat can be enhanced by reducing fragmentation. The key theoretical result is that the marginal net benefits of increasing forest can be convex, in which case corner solutions—converting either none or all of the agricultural land in a section to forest—may be optimal. Corner solutions are directly linked to the spatial process determining habitat benefits and the regulator's incomplete information regarding landowner opportunity costs. We present findings from large-scale empirical landscape simulations that support our key theoretical results.     

Analysis of EU support for managed succession of agricultural land in the Czech Republic

The article presents a comparison of EAFRD support for afforestation of agricultural land (managed succession) in the years of 2007–2013 and model costs required to compensate for both operational inputs and agricultural income forgone when establishing woodland on agricultural land in the Czech Republic.The aim was to investigate whether the blanket support rates for the afforestation of agricultural land are sufficient to cover the associated costs in a wide range of site conditions. Costs were calculated for 43 groups based on forest typology. The calculation was based on the comparison of present costs and present revenues (here: European fund support) with the discount rate of 3% and a 15-year evaluation period. The analysis demonstrated that input costs vary considerably in the different forest typologies; 44% of groups show higher present costs than the support rates currently available. In the most expensive group costs are 150% higher than even an increased support rate in less favoured areas available to agricultural entrepreneurs, and almost 200% in comparison with the basic support rate. In several cases – and always in case of pine management – the support payments are notably higher than the related input costs, and because of that the land owner might be strongly motivated to change the land use from agriculture to forestry.The article points out the sensitivity of the results to the discount rate used and to the importance of the CZK/Euro exchange rate fluctuation.The analysis’ results lead us to strongly encourage a more substantial differentiation of the support rates for afforestation of agricultural, and other, land. This differentiation should be based on realistic input costs according to forest typology – the methodology of which might be relevant in several other EU countries.     

Reducing or creating poverty? Analyzing livelihood impacts of forest carbon projects with evidence from India

Forest carbon projects, in addition to climate mitigation and conservation benefits, are expected to improve local livelihoods and contribute to poverty alleviation across developing countries. Despite substantial investments over last decade, there is limited empirical evidence on the livelihood impacts of these projects especially across different socioeconomic categories.This paper aims to contribute to this knowledge gap through an analysis of the livelihood impacts across small, medium and large categories of participating farmers in a forest carbon project from the state of Haryana in India. Data from 107 households have been analysed to study the impacts in terms of foregone crop, fodder and fuel wood benefits. The analysis suggests that the project has adversely affected the livelihoods of all three categories of farmers. However, small and marginal farmers are the most distressed due to their low incomes, asset base and risk-bearing capacities.It raises critical project design issues such as binding land use, delayed accrual of benefits, static opportunity costs and displacement of existing economic activities, which have serious livelihood and equity implications. Unless these issues are addressed and strong safety nets are provided, forest carbon projects might create more poverty than wellbeing for marginal communities.     

中国森林碳汇需求研究

首先,在梳理了相关文献的基础上,归纳总结了森林碳汇的相关概念、森林碳汇的计量方法、森林碳汇的效益。其次,阐述了中国森林碳汇市场需求不足的现状。再次,对森林碳汇需求及其影响因素进行研究分析。其中,企业森林碳汇需求主要受内部特征因素、外部动力因素和市场机制三大因素影响;社会公众需求主要受个人特征因素、主观意识因素和外部条件因素三大因素影响。最后,提出要加强森林碳汇需求方面的研究等建议。     

Financial costs and benefits of a program of measures to implement a National Strategy on Biological Diversity in Germany

The implementation of the National Biodiversity Strategies and Actions Plans (NBSAP), as required by Article 6 of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), would improve the base for political decisions by quantifying the costs and benefits of biodiversity conservation in monetary terms and by illustrating the benefits of related ecosystem services (ESS). However, so far the costs and benefits of the NBSAP have not been routinely estimated. This paper presents results from research quantifying the financial costs and benefits of implementing a set of measures based on the National Strategy on Biological Diversity in Germany (NBS). Based on the NBS and the Quality Status Reports of the EU Habitat Directive, a conservation program was developed consisting of land use changes for six ecosystems/land use types: forests, arable land, grassland, peatlands, wetlands and dry habitats. In addition to the benefits of maintaining biodiversity, two potential ESS benefits of the NBS, water purification and climate mitigation, are estimated as well as the financial costs of implementation. A nationwide contingent valuation study was undertaken to determine the benefits of maintaining biodiversity as a result of the conservation program. The benefits of the conservation program with regard to the ESS water purification are calculated for N-reduction in the leachate and based on abatement costs. The contribution of nature conservation to climate mitigation is calculated for the avoidance of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and based on damage costs. The results of the study indicate that the implementation of the NBS would lead to significant financial costs, but the benefits would exceed the financial costs of measures.     

Making community forest management work in northern Vietnam by pioneering participatory action

Transfer of land-use rights from the state to individual households and groups of households to encourage community forest management (CFM) and use of forest resources for livelihood improvement, has been in place in Vietnam since the 1990s. However, to date there has been no evidence of allocation to groups of households as community entities with joint ownership. This paper examines the success of processes tested in four villages in mountainous northern Vietnam to officially secure joint ownership of and exclusive rights to community forest land. After four years, implementation of CFM led to enhanced equality and distribution of benefits, and better protection of forest resources. Household income remained largely unchanged, in part because of loss of income from activities which were now illegal, but also because it was too early for benefits to flow from new forestry initiatives. Active participation of and between village communities in land-use planning and allocation, and a willingness to compromise, particularly on the position of land boundaries, were essential elements to ensuring equity in the distribution of benefits. Lack of enabling processes and experience in the implementation of government policies mean that further support for village communities is needed to fully realize the benefits from joint management of the allocated community forest.     

国有林场森林资源经营模式改革的思考

国有林场在我国林业建设事业中起到了十分重要的作用。随着林改的不断深化,国有林场也积极谋求新的发展路子,分析国有林场的经营现状及其发展中存在的主要问题,针对国有林场在经营发展中面临着重重困难,如何搞好国有林场的林业分类经营,更好地实现生态与经济的双重效益,提出改革建议。     

Perceived importance of ecosystem services in the Białowieża Forest for local communities – Does proximity matter?

Effective protection of biodiversity in areas of high conservation value requires trade-offs between local use of natural resources and conservation restrictions. The compromise is often difficult to reach, which causes conflicts over the management priorities of existing and potential protected areas. Ecosystem services (ES) perspective offers a promising avenue for diagnosing and reconciling contrasting interests concerning the use of benefits from ecosystems. We examined how the spatial proximity to the Białowieża Forest (BF), a European biodiversity hotspot, affects the perceived use of ES by local communities. We performed a survey among 719 respondents from 35 villages situated within BF and in its vicinity. We found that both the declared use of ES and the perceived influence of ES on household’s economy was declining with the distance from BF with particularly high differences between areas not further than 3 km from BF and areas located 3-15 km from BF. Different zones varied in terms of benefits from tourism and costs connected with a potential limited access to ES due to conservation. Broadening the perspective, we argue that the trade-offs linked to ES may vary depending on the location in relation to the protected area and that local communities should not be treated as a homogenous group when considering benefits from the forest. Awareness of common patterns of ES use over space and local specificity may enhance effective management of even highly contested conservation areas.     

收益法在林地资产评估中的表现形式及应用探讨

收益法是林地资产评估中常用的一种方法,随着林业产权制度改革深入推进,林地交易行为越来越多,林地租金支付方式呈现各种形式,收益法公式形式多样。在分析《森林资源资产评估技术规范（试行）》中涉及的两种收益法公式的基础上,根据林地纯收益获取的方式,提出三种不同收益情况下的收益法计算公式,分析各种收益法计算公式的适用性,并举例说明收益法的应用,旨在进一步完善林地资产评估方法体系,为开展林地资产评估业务提供技术支撑。