IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v20y2012icp78-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wood provisioning in Mediterranean forests: A bottom-up spatial valuation approach

Author

Listed:
  • Ojea, Elena
  • Ruiz-Benito, Paloma
  • Markandya, Anil
  • Zavala, Miguel A.

Abstract

The science of ecosystem services has evolved significantly in the last decade following an increase in interest in the understanding and valuation of these services. Forests provide important ecosystem services that supply societal needs, such as timber, but this provision is not free of conflicts derived from the intensive management of forests. A GIS based approach using data from national forest inventories allows us to identify the provision of timber services and to conduct its valuation. The analysis includes a sample of 37,761 plots for 38 commercial tree species in the Spanish Mediterranean region, where we identify sustainable and non-sustainable forests in terms of harvesting intensities and value both the flow of benefits and their net present value. From the analysis we conclude that non-sustainable forests are providing higher economic returns than sustainable forests for most abundant tree species. However, when analysing long term trends, results show that sustainable forests yield higher economic benefits. This latter perspective is preferred when looking at the value of timber as a provisioning service of forests. According to our results, if we wish to encourage sustainability we need to (a) get lower discount rates adopted for the private sector and (b) ensure longer time horizons.

Suggested Citation

  • Ojea, Elena & Ruiz-Benito, Paloma & Markandya, Anil & Zavala, Miguel A., 2012. "Wood provisioning in Mediterranean forests: A bottom-up spatial valuation approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 78-88.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:20:y:2012:i:c:p:78-88
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2012.03.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934112000743
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2012.03.003?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Troy, Austin & Wilson, Matthew A., 2006. "Mapping ecosystem services: Practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 435-449, December.
    2. Stephen Polasky & Kathleen Segerson, 2009. "Integrating Ecology and Economics in the Study of Ecosystem Services: Some Lessons Learned," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 409-434, September.
    3. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    4. Chen, Nengwang & Li, Huancheng & Wang, Lihong, 2009. "A GIS-based approach for mapping direct use value of ecosystem services at a county scale: Management implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2768-2776, September.
    5. Orois, Sofia Sanchez & Chang, Sun Joseph & Gadow, Klaus von, 2004. "Optimal residual growing stock and cutting cycle in mixed uneven-aged maritime pine stands in Northwestern Spain," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 145-152, March.
    6. I.J. Bateman & A.P. Jones & A.A. Lovett & I.R. Lake & B.H. Day, 2002. "Applying Geographical Information Systems (GIS) to Environmental and Resource Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 219-269, June.
    7. Ovando, Paola & Campos, Pablo & Calama, Rafael & Montero, Gregorio, 2010. "Landowner net benefit from Stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) afforestation of dry-land cereal fields in Valladolid, Spain," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 83-100, April.
    8. Campos, Pablo & Caparros, Alejandro, 2006. "Social and private total Hicksian incomes of multiple use forests in Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 545-557, June.
    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. Patricia González-Díaz & Paloma Ruiz-Benito & Jorge Gosalbez Ruiz & Gregorio Chamorro & Miguel A. Zavala, 2019. "A Multifactorial Approach to Value Supporting Ecosystem Services in Spanish Forests and Its Implications in a Warming World," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-24, January.
    2. Julija Konstantinavičienė & Vlada Vitunskienė, 2023. "Definition and Classification of Potential of Forest Wood Biomass in Terms of Sustainable Development: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-19, 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. Jan Philipp Schägner & Luke Brander & Joachim Maes & Volkmar Hartje, 2012. "Mapping Ecosystem Services’ Values: Current Practice and Future Prospects," Working Papers 2012.59, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    2. Jung A Lee & Jinhyung Chon & Changwoo Ahn, 2014. "Planning Landscape Corridors in Ecological Infrastructure Using Least-Cost Path Methods Based on the Value of Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-22, October.
    3. Schägner, Jan Philipp & Brander, Luke & Maes, Joachim & Hartje, Volkmar, 2013. "Mapping ecosystem services' values: Current practice and future prospects," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 33-46.
    4. Mellino, Salvatore & Ripa, Maddalena & Zucaro, Amalia & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2014. "An emergy–GIS approach to the evaluation of renewable resource flows: A case study of Campania Region, Italy," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 271(C), pages 103-112.
    5. Crossman, Neville D. & Burkhard, Benjamin & Nedkov, Stoyan & Willemen, Louise & Petz, Katalin & Palomo, Ignacio & Drakou, Evangelia G. & Martín-Lopez, Berta & McPhearson, Timon & Boyanova, Kremena & , 2013. "A blueprint for mapping and modelling ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 4-14.
    6. Pandeya, B. & Buytaert, W. & Zulkafli, Z. & Karpouzoglou, T. & Mao, F. & Hannah, D.M., 2016. "A comparative analysis of ecosystem services valuation approaches for application at the local scale and in data scarce regions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 250-259.
    7. Qenani-Petrela, Eivis & Noel, Jay E. & Mastin, Thomas, 2007. "A Benefit Transfer Approach to the Estimation of Agro-Ecosystems Services Benefits: A Case Study of Kern County, California," Research Project Reports 121605, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California Institute for the Study of Specialty Crops.
    8. Richardson, Leslie & Loomis, John & Kroeger, Timm & Casey, Frank, 2015. "The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 51-58.
    9. Ho¨lzinger, Oliver & Horst, Dan van der & Sadler, Jon, 2014. "City-wide Ecosystem Assessments—Lessons from Birmingham," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 98-105.
    10. Cullinan, John & Hynes, Stephen & O'Donoghue, Cathal, 2011. "Using spatial microsimulation to account for demographic and spatial factors in environmental benefit transfer," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 813-824, February.
    11. Campbell, Danny & Sinclair, Victoria, 2008. "Mapping preferences for the restoration of environmental damage caused by illegal dumping," 82nd Annual Conference, March 31 - April 2, 2008, Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, UK 36772, Agricultural Economics Society.
    12. Chalkiadakis, Charis & Drakou, Evangelia G. & Kraak, Menno-Jan, 2022. "Ecosystem service flows: A systematic literature review of marine systems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    13. Paola Ovando & José L. Oviedo & Pablo Campos, 2015. "Measuring total social income of a stone pine afforestation in Huelva (Spain)," Working Papers 1501, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    14. Vilém Pechanec & Helena Kilianová & Elwis Tangwa & Alena Vondráková & Ivo Machar, 2019. "What is the Development Capacity for Provision of Ecosystem Services in the Czech Republic?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-17, August.
    15. Tait, Peter & Baskaran, Ramesh & Cullen, Ross & Bicknell, Kathryn, 2012. "Nonmarket valuation of water quality: Addressing spatially heterogeneous preferences using GIS and a random parameter logit model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 15-21.
    16. Schirpke, Uta & Scolozzi, Rocco & De Marco, Claudio & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2014. "Mapping beneficiaries of ecosystem services flows from Natura 2000 sites," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 170-179.
    17. Léa Tardieu, 2017. "The need for integrated spatial assessments in ecosystem service mapping," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(3), pages 173-200, December.
    18. Klain, Sarah C. & Satterfield, Terre A. & Chan, Kai M.A., 2014. "What matters and why? Ecosystem services and their bundled qualities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 310-320.
    19. Ileana Pătru-Stupariu & Constantina Alina Hossu & Simona Raluca Grădinaru & Andreea Nita & Mihai-Sorin Stupariu & Alina Huzui-Stoiculescu & Athanasios-Alexandru Gavrilidis, 2020. "A Review of Changes in Mountain Land Use and Ecosystem Services: From Theory to Practice," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-21, September.
    20. Emily C. Hazell, 2020. "Disaggregating Ecosystem Benefits: An Integrated Environmental-Deprivation Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-20, September.

    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:20:y:2012:i:c:p:78-88. 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.