IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/endeec/v7y2002i02p325-340_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Local and global benefits of subsidizing tropical forest conservation

Author

Listed:
  • Hunt, Colin

Abstract

The article describes and quantifies the financial benefits of small-scale community forestry, conducted on an ecologically sustainable basis—‘eco-forestry’, by customary landowners in Papua New Guinea. Through economic modelling the article also attempts to quantify the global benefits generated. Eco-forestry is subsidized by donors directly and through NGOs in its setting up and certification. Financial modelling suggests that, with a subsidy, eco-forestry is capable of generating a return to landowners that is comparable to industrial logging. While the return to logging followed by conversion to agriculture is much more attractive than eco-forestry, agriculture is an option available only in some locations. Economic modelling finds that the external economic benefits emanating from tropical forest conservation that replaces logging in Papua New Guinea are far greater in scale than the financial benefits to landowners. However, the lack of reliable data on the environmental benefits of forest conservation means that economic analysis is somewhat inconclusive. The need for further research to quantify environmental benefits is thus highlighted. The subsidization of forest conservation directly, instead of indirectly through small-scale forestry, is investigated and found to generate a similar level of economic benefits to eco-forestry. However, the cost of direct subsidization is greater. Moreover, mechanisms for direct subsidy are undeveloped in Papua New Guinea. Donors may prefer to continue to subsidize small-scale forestry where it replaces logging because of its apparent conservation and side benefits and because it is operational, while at the same time exploring and extending cost-effective models of direct conservation that have the advantage over eco-forestry of being applicable in more remote areas. Compared with industrial logging, eco-forestry contributes little to consolidated revenue. Therefore it is to be expected that eco-forestry will meet government resistance if it makes significant inroads into the allocation of logging concessions.

Suggested Citation

  • Hunt, Colin, 2002. "Local and global benefits of subsidizing tropical forest conservation," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 325-340, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:endeec:v:7:y:2002:i:02:p:325-340_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1355770X02000207/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Heli Lu & Guifang Liu, 2015. "Opportunity Costs of Carbon Emissions Stemming from Changes in Land Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-18, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:endeec:v:7:y:2002:i:02:p:325-340_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ede .

    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.