IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v168y2024ics1389934124001552.html

Projected effects of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on global forest products markets

Author

Listed:
  • Nepal, Prakash
  • Lamica, Austin
  • Parajuli, Rajan

Abstract

This study provided an insight into the projected short-term (<10 years) and long-term (next 10 to 30 years) effects of the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine on global forest products trade and associated markets. The assessment was conducted by comparing the projected outcomes from the Global Forest Products Market (GFPM) model for a business-as-usual reference (no invasion) scenario and an alternate scenario representing the current trade sanctions for Russian wood products trade by several major partner countries, and the potential trade disruption in Ukraine due to their military operations, during the 2021–2025 period, and no such trade restrictions thereafter assuming the Russian invasion ends by that time. Results indicate a considerable projected short-term disruption in the Russian, Ukrainian, and the global wood products sector in terms of higher prices of industrial roundwood and finished wood products (up to 3%) and altered production, consumption and trade displacement for wood products. However, in the long run, a lower overall disruption is projected as Russian markets for industrial roundwood and sawnwood start to recover and the global markets begin to converge to pre-invasion levels. The analysis also projects that Russian markets for wood-based panels and paper and paperboard and Ukrainian markets for paper and paperboard do not recover within the next 30 years, suggesting a likely permanent structural change in markets of these wood product groups. These findings suggest several economic and environmental implications for the forest products sector in Russia, Ukraine and the rest of the world in the near- and long-term.

Suggested Citation

  • Nepal, Prakash & Lamica, Austin & Parajuli, Rajan, 2024. "Projected effects of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on global forest products markets," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:168:y:2024:i:c:s1389934124001552
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103301
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001552
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103301?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Buongiorno, Joseph & Rougieux, Paul & Barkaoui, Ahmed & Zhu, Shushuai & Harou, Patrice, 2014. "Potential impact of a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership on the global forest sector," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 252-266.
    2. Charles H. Anderton & John R. Carter, 2001. "The Impact of War on Trade: An Interrupted Times-Series Study," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 38(4), pages 445-457, July.
    3. Fida Karam & Chahir Zaki, 2016. "How did wars dampen trade in the MENA region?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(60), pages 5909-5930, December.
    4. Morrow, James D. & Siverson, Randolph M. & Tabares, Tressa E., 1998. "The Political Determinants of International Trade: The Major Powers, 1907–1990," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(3), pages 649-661, September.
    5. Mansfield, Edward D. & Pevehouse, Jon C., 2000. "Trade Blocs, Trade Flows, and International Conflict," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 54(4), pages 775-808, October.
    6. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Johnston, Craig, 2014. "Global impacts of Russian log export restrictions and the Canada–U.S. lumber dispute: Modeling trade in logs and lumber," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 54-66.
    7. Johnston, Craig M.T. & Parajuli, Rajan, 2017. "What's next in the U.S.-Canada softwood lumber dispute? An economic analysis of restrictive trade policy measures," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P1), pages 135-146.
    8. Devadoss, Stephen & Ridley, William, 2024. "Impacts of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the global wheat market," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    9. Buongiorno, Joseph & Johnston, Craig & Zhu, Shushuai, 2017. "An assessment of gains and losses from international trade in the forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 209-217.
    10. Johnston, Craig M.T., 2016. "Global paper market forecasts to 2030 under future internet demand scenarios," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 14-28.
    11. Adam Rose & Zhenhua Chen & Dan Wei, 2023. "The economic impacts of Russia–Ukraine War export disruptions of grain commodities," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(2), pages 645-665, June.
    12. Pan, Wenqi & Chang, Wei-Yew & Wu, Ting & Zhang, Han & Ning, Zhuo & Yang, Hongqiang, 2021. "Impacts of the China-US trade restrictions on the global forest sector: A bilateral trade flow analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    13. Reuven Glick & Alan M. Taylor, 2010. "Collateral Damage: Trade Disruption and the Economic Impact of War," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 102-127, February.
    14. Bolkesjø, Torjus F. & Buongiorno, Joseph, 2006. "Short- and long-run exchange rate effects on forest product trade: Evidence from panel data," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 205-221, January.
    15. S. Brock Blomberg & Gregory D. Hess, 2006. "How Much Does Violence Tax Trade?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 599-612, November.
    16. Li, Ruhong & Buongiorno, J. & Turner, J.A. & Zhu, S. & Prestemon, J., 2008. "Long-term effects of eliminating illegal logging on the world forest industries, trade, and inventory," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(7-8), pages 480-490, October.
    17. Pollins, Brian M., 1989. "Does Trade Still Follow the Flag?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(2), pages 465-480, June.
    18. Paul Collier & V. L. Elliott & Håvard Hegre & Anke Hoeffler & Marta Reynal-Querol & Nicholas Sambanis, 2003. "Breaking the Conflict Trap : Civil War and Development Policy," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 13938, April.
    19. Koop, Gary & Tole, Lise, 1999. "Is there an environmental Kuznets curve for deforestation?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 231-244, February.
    20. Buongiorno, Joseph & Johnston, Craig, 2018. "Effects of parameter and data uncertainty on long-term projections in a model of the global forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 10-17.
    21. Buongiorno, Joseph & Raunikar, Ronald & Zhu, Shushuai, 2011. "Consequences of increasing bioenergy demand on wood and forests: An application of the Global Forest Products Model," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 214-229, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Rangan Gupta & Giray Gozgor & Huseyin Kaya & Ender Demir, 2019. "Effects of geopolitical risks on trade flows: evidence from the gravity model," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(4), pages 515-530, December.
    2. Reuven Glick & Alan M. Taylor, 2010. "Collateral Damage: Trade Disruption and the Economic Impact of War," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 102-127, February.
    3. Anderton Charles H. & Anderton Roxane A., 2021. "The Trade Disruption Hypothesis Fails for State-Sponsored Genocides and Mass Atrocities: Why It Matters," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 27(2), pages 143-168, May.
    4. Kamin, Katrin, 2022. "Bilateral trade and conflict heterogeneity: The impact of conflict on trade revisited," Kiel Working Papers 2222, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    5. Miguel Riviere & Sylvain Caurla, 2020. "Representations of the Forest Sector in Economic Models [Les représentations du secteur forestier dans les modèles économiques]," Post-Print hal-03088084, HAL.
    6. Reuven Glick & Alan M. Taylor, 2010. "Collateral Damage: Trade Disruption and the Economic Impact of War," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 102-127, February.
    7. Xianhua Wu & Yingying Wang & Lingjuan Yang & Shunfeng Song & Guo Wei & Ji Guo, 2016. "Impact of political dispute on international trade based on an international trade Inoperability Input-Output Model: A case study of the 2012 Diaoyu Islands Dispute," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 47-70, February.
    8. Vincenzo Bove & Leandro Elia & Petros G. Sekeris, 2014. "US Security Strategy and the Gains from Bilateral Trade," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 863-885, November.
    9. Yuleng Zeng, 2020. "Bluff to peace: How economic dependence promotes peace despite increasing deception and uncertainty," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(6), pages 633-654, November.
    10. Muhammad, Andrew & D’Souza, Anna & Amponsah, William, 2013. "Violence, Instability, and Trade: Evidence from Kenya’s Cut Flower Sector," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 20-31.
    11. Philippe Martin & Thierry Mayer & Mathias Thoenig, 2012. "The Geography of Conflicts and Regional Trade Agreements," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 1-35, October.
    12. Cullen F. Goenner, 2011. "Simultaneity between Trade and Conflict: Endogenous Instruments of Mass Destruction," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 28(5), pages 459-477, November.
    13. Ryan Brutger & Tim Marple, 2024. "Butterfly effects in global trade: International borders, disputes, and trade disruption and diversion," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 61(6), pages 903-916, November.
    14. Bonginkosi Mamba & Andr� C Jordaan & Matthew Clance, 2015. "Globalisation and Conflicts: A Theoretical Approach," Working Papers 201555, University of Pretoria, Department of Economics.
    15. Ronald Umali Mendoza & Charles Siriban & Tea Jalin Ty, 2019. "Survey Of Economic Implications Of Maritime And Territorial Disputes," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 1028-1049, July.
    16. Philippe Aghion & Xavier Jaravel & Torsten Persson & Dorothée Rouzet, 2019. "Education and Military Rivalry," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(2), pages 376-412.
    17. Fida Karam & Chahir Zaki, 2016. "How did wars dampen trade in the MENA region?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(60), pages 5909-5930, December.
    18. Yaying Liu & Jin Chen & Churen Sun, 2022. "Partnership Diplomacy and China’s Exports," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-22, September.
    19. Ni, Guohua & Teng, Man & Su, Bin & Chen, Zhenling, 2024. "Impact of political relationships on virtual land flow from China's food trade," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    20. Yan, Jiaqiang & Zhou, Yonghong, 2021. "Economic return to political support: Evidence from voting on the representation of China in the United Nations," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:forpol:v:168:y:2024:i:c:s1389934124001552. 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.