IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v13y2011i7p520-524.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effects of introducing modern technology on the financial, labour and energy performance of forest operations in the Italian Alps

Author

Listed:
  • Spinelli, Raffaele
  • Magagnotti, Natascia

Abstract

A study was conducted on 5 different plots to compare the performance of traditional and mechanized operations. The test plots were considered representative of conifer plantations in the Alps and were split in two halves, each harvested with a different technology level. During harvesting, researchers recorded all work time, volume output and resource usage of all ongoing operations on a daily basis. These data were used to calculate harvesting cost, labour productivity and energy consumption. As an average, the application of modern harvesting technology allowed reducing harvesting cost by a half, shrinking it to 24.8 [euro] m- 3 from the original 50.1 [euro] m- 3. However, the rates actually paid by the forest owner were not significantly different, and were in the range of 40 [euro] m- 3. This may indicate that the mechanized firm and the traditional firm internalize a significant portion of the profits and the losses, respectively. Such instance may depend on the virtual oligopoly enjoyed by mechanized firms and on the capacity of traditional firms to use resources available at marginal costs. Mechanization allows multiplying operator productivity and for this reason achieves an overwhelming superiority over traditional technology, which makes it a better choice even when utilization rates and labour cost are comparatively low. A break-even between the two technology levels is obtained only when the utilization rate and labour cost are not higher than 300 h year- 1 and 8 [euro] h- 1 respectively. Furthermore, the introduction of modern machinery does not result in a higher consumption of fossil energy per unit of product. A major technology shift may be occurring in Italian forest operations, as it did occur further north in recent years.

Suggested Citation

  • Spinelli, Raffaele & Magagnotti, Natascia, 2011. "The effects of introducing modern technology on the financial, labour and energy performance of forest operations in the Italian Alps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(7), pages 520-524, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:13:y:2011:i:7:p:520-524
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138993411100089X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vokoun, Melinda & Amacher, Gregory S. & Wear, David N., 2006. "Scale of harvesting by non-industrial private forest landowners," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 223-244, January.
    2. Bolkesjø, Torjus Folsland & Solberg, Birger & Wangen, Knut Reidar, 2007. "Heterogeneity in nonindustrial private roundwood supply: Lessons from a large panel of forest owners," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 7-28, May.
    3. Nanang, David M. & Ghebremichael, Asghedom, 2006. "Inter-regional comparisons of production technology in Canada's timber harvesting industries," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 797-810, November.
    4. Bauch, Simone C. & Amacher, Gregory S. & Merry, Frank D., 2007. "Costs of harvesting, transportation and milling in the Brazilian Amazon: Estimation and policy implications," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 903-915, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rachele Venanzi & Rodolfo Picchio & Raffaele Spinelli & Stefano Grigolato, 2020. "Soil Disturbance and Recovery after Coppicing a Mediterranean Oak Stand: The Effects of Silviculture and Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-20, May.
    2. Fuertes, A. & Oliveira, N. & Cañellas, I. & Sixto, H. & Rodríguez-Soalleiro, R., 2021. "An economic overview of Populus spp. in Short Rotation Coppice systems under Mediterranean conditions: An assessment tool for decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    3. Ger Devlin & Radomír Klvač, 2014. "How Technology Can Improve the Efficiency of Excavator-Based Cable Harvesting for Potential Biomass Extraction—A Woody Productivity Resource and Cost Analysis for Ireland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-22, December.
    4. Spinelli, Raffaele & Magagnotti, Natascia & Jessup, Eric & Soucy, Michel, 2017. "Perspectives and challenges of logging enterprises in the Italian Alps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 44-51.
    5. Arkadiusz Dyjakon, 2018. "Harvesting and Baling of Pruned Biomass in Apple Orchards for Energy Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-14, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lundmark, Robert & Olsson, Anna, 2015. "Factor substitution and procurement competition for forest resources in Sweden," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 99-109.
    2. Josset, Clement & Shanafelt, David W. & Abildtrup, Jens & Stenger, Anne, 2023. "Probabilistic typology of private forest owners: A tool to target the development of new market for ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    3. Vokoun, Melinda & Amacher, Gregory S. & Sullivan, Jay & Wear, Dave, 2010. "Examining incentives for adjacent non-industrial private forest landowners to cooperate," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 104-110, February.
    4. Trømborg, Erik & Havskjold, Monica & Lislebø, Ole & Rørstad, Per Kristian, 2011. "Projecting demand and supply of forest biomass for heating in Norway," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7049-7058.
    5. Julia Touza & Charles Perrings & María Chas Amil, 2010. "Harvest Decisions and Spatial Landscape Attributes: The Case of Galician Communal Forests," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(1), pages 75-91, May.
    6. Novais, Ana & Canadas, Maria João, 2010. "Understanding the management logic of private forest owners: A new approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 173-180, March.
    7. Størdal, Ståle & Lien, Gudbrand & Baardsen, Sjur, 2008. "Analyzing determinants of forest owners' decision-making using a sample selection framework," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 159-176, June.
    8. Ma, Zhao & Clarke, Mysha & Church, Sarah P., 2018. "Insights into individual and cooperative invasive plant management on family forestlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 682-693.
    9. Håbesland, Daniel E. & Kilgore, Michael A. & Becker, Dennis R. & Snyder, Stephanie A. & Solberg, Birger & Sjølie, Hanne K. & Lindstad, Berit H., 2016. "Norwegian family forest owners' willingness to participate in carbon offset programs," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 30-38.
    10. Stuart, William B. & Grace, Laura A. & Grala, Robert K., 2010. "Returns to scale in the Eastern United States logging industry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(6), pages 451-456, July.
    11. Lindhjem, Henrik & Mitani, Yohei, 2012. "Forest owners’ willingness to accept compensation for voluntary conservation: A contingent valuation approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 290-302.
    12. Alfranca, Oscar & Voces, Roberto & Herruzo, A. Casimiro & Diaz-Balteiro, Luis, 2014. "Effects of innovation on the European wood industry market structure," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 40-47.
    13. Wang, Shuo & An, Henry, 2019. "Technical change and productivity growth in the Alberta logging industry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 130-137.
    14. Rodríguez-Vicente, Verónica & Marey-Pérez, Manuel F., 2010. "Analysis of individual private forestry in northern Spain according to economic factors related to management," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 269-295, December.
    15. Amacher, Gregory S. & Ollikainen, Markku & Koskela, Erkki, 2012. "Corruption and forest concessions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 92-104.
    16. Staal Wästerlund, D. & Kronholm, T., 2014. "Market analysis of harvesting services engaged by private forest owners in Sweden," 2014, Number 45, May 22-24, 2014, Uppsala, Sweden, Scandinavian Forest Economics: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics, vol. 2014(45), pages 1-9, December.
    17. Elyakime, B. & Cabanettes, A., 2009. "How to improve the marketing of timber in France?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 169-173, May.
    18. Mäntymaa, Erkki & Pouta, Eija & Hiedanpää, Juha, 2021. "Forest owners' interest in participation and their compensation claims in voluntary landscape value trading: The case of wind power parks in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    19. Petucco, Claudio & Abildtrup, Jens & Stenger, Anne, 2015. "Influences of nonindustrial private forest landowners’ management priorities on the timber harvest decision—A case study in France," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 152-166.
    20. Augustynczik, Andrey Lessa Derci & Arce, Julio Eduardo & Yousefpour, Rasoul & da Silva, Arinei Carlos Lindbeck, 2016. "Promoting harvesting stands connectivity and its economic implications in Brazilian forest plantations applying integer linear programming and simulated annealing," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 120-129.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:13:y:2011:i:7:p:520-524. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.