IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v6y2017i4p84-d121296.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Sustainability of EU Timber Consumption Trends: Comparing Consumption Scenarios with a Safe Operating Space Scenario for Global and EU Timber Supply

Author

Listed:
  • Meghan O’Brien

    (Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, 42103 Wuppertal, Germany
    Center for Environmental Systems Research, University of Kassel, 34117 Kassel, Germany)

  • Stefan Bringezu

    (Center for Environmental Systems Research, University of Kassel, 34117 Kassel, Germany)

Abstract

The growing demand for wood to meet EU renewable energy targets has increasingly come under scrutiny for potentially increasing EU import dependence and inducing land use change abroad, with associated impacts on the climate and biodiversity. This article builds on research accounting for levels of primary timber consumption—e.g., toward forest footprints—and developing reference values for benchmarking sustainability—e.g., toward land use targets—in order to improve systemic monitoring of timber and forest use. Specifically, it looks at future trends to assess how current EU policy may impact forests at an EU and global scale. Future demand scenarios are based on projections derived and adapted from the literature to depict developments under different scenario assumptions. Results reveal that by 2030, EU consumption levels on a per capita basis are estimated to be increasingly disproportionate compared to the rest of the world. EU consumption scenarios based on meeting around a 40% share of the EU renewable energy targets with timber would overshoot both the EU and global reference value range for sustainable supply capacities in 2030. Overall, findings support literature pointing to an increased risk of problem shifting relating to both how much and where timber needed for meeting renewable energy targets is sourced. It is argued that a sustainable level of timber consumption should be characterized by balance between supply (what the forest can provide on a sustainable basis) and demand (how much is used on a per capita basis, considering the concept of fair shares). To this end, future research should close data gaps, increase methodological robustness and address the socio-political legitimacy of the safe operating space concept towards targets in the future. A re-use of timber within the economy should be supported to increase supply options.

Suggested Citation

  • Meghan O’Brien & Stefan Bringezu, 2017. "Assessing the Sustainability of EU Timber Consumption Trends: Comparing Consumption Scenarios with a Safe Operating Space Scenario for Global and EU Timber Supply," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-16, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:6:y:2017:i:4:p:84-:d:121296
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/6/4/84/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/6/4/84/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meghan O’Brien & Stefan Bringezu, 2017. "What Is a Sustainable Level of Timber Consumption in the EU: Toward Global and EU Benchmarks for Sustainable Forest Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    2. Luke Gibson & Tien Ming Lee & Lian Pin Koh & Barry W. Brook & Toby A. Gardner & Jos Barlow & Carlos A. Peres & Corey J. A. Bradshaw & William F. Laurance & Thomas E. Lovejoy & Navjot S. Sodhi, 2011. "Primary forests are irreplaceable for sustaining tropical biodiversity," Nature, Nature, vol. 478(7369), pages 378-381, October.
    3. Hurmekoski, Elias & Hetemäki, Lauri, 2013. "Studying the future of the forest sector: Review and implications for long-term outlook studies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 17-29.
    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. O'Brien, Meghan & Bringezu, Stefan, 2018. "European Timber Consumption: Developing a Method to Account for Timber Flows and the EU's Global Forest Footprint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 322-332.

    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. Wen-Yong Guo & Josep M. Serra-Diaz & Wolf L. Eiserhardt & Brian S. Maitner & Cory Merow & Cyrille Violle & Matthew J. Pound & Miao Sun & Ferry Slik & Anne Blach-Overgaard & Brian J. Enquist & Jens-Chr, 2023. "Climate change and land use threaten global hotspots of phylogenetic endemism for trees," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Bernard W T Coetzee & Kevin J Gaston & Steven L Chown, 2014. "Local Scale Comparisons of Biodiversity as a Test for Global Protected Area Ecological Performance: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-11, August.
    3. Huang, Wei, 2019. "Forest condition change, tenure reform, and government-funded eco-environmental programs in Northeast China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 67-74.
    4. Figueiredo, Paulo N., 2016. "Evolution of the short-fiber technological trajectory in Brazil's pulp and paper industry: The role of firm-level innovative capability-building and indigenous institutions," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-14.
    5. Serge Mandiefe Piabuo & Peter A. Minang & Chupezi Julius Tieguhong & Divine Foundjem-Tita & Frankline Nghobuoche, 2021. "Illegal logging, governance effectiveness and carbon dioxide emission in the timber-producing countries of Congo Basin and Asia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 14176-14196, October.
    6. Jinfeng Wang & Ya Li & Sheng Wang & Qing Li & Lingfeng Li & Xiaoling Liu, 2023. "Assessment of Multiple Ecosystem Services and Ecological Security Pattern in Shanxi Province, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-18, March.
    7. Hengeveld, Geerten M. & Schüll, Elmar & Trubins, Renats & Sallnäs, Ola, 2017. "Forest Landscape Development Scenarios (FoLDS)–A framework for integrating forest models, owners' behaviour and socio-economic developments," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 245-255.
    8. Matias Heino & Matti Kummu & Marika Makkonen & Mark Mulligan & Peter H Verburg & Mika Jalava & Timo A Räsänen, 2015. "Forest Loss in Protected Areas and Intact Forest Landscapes: A Global Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-21, October.
    9. Lauri, Pekka & Forsell, Nicklas & Di Fulvio, Fulvio & Snäll, Tord & Havlik, Petr, 2021. "Material substitution between coniferous, non-coniferous and recycled biomass – Impacts on forest industry raw material use and regional competitiveness," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    10. Juan José Cadillo-Benalcazar & José Carlos Silva-Macher & Norma Salinas, 2024. "Applying the Multi-Scale Integrated Analysis of Societal and Ecosystem Metabolism (MuSIASEM) to characterize the society–agriculture–forest system: the case of Huayopata, Cuzco (Peru)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(12), pages 29839-29862, December.
    11. Sharif A. Mukul & Narayan Saha, 2017. "Conservation Benefits of Tropical Multifunctional Land-Uses in and Around a Forest Protected Area of Bangladesh," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-12, January.
    12. Kan, Siyi & Chen, Bin & Han, Mengyao & Hayat, Tasawar & Alsulami, Hamed & Chen, Guoqian, 2021. "China’s forest land use change in the globalized world economy: Foreign trade and unequal household consumption," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    13. Alexandru Giurca & Liviu Nichiforel & Petru Tudor Stăncioiu & Marian Drăgoi & Daniel-Paul Dima, 2022. "Unlocking Romania’s Forest-Based Bioeconomy Potential: Knowledge-Action-Gaps and the Way Forward," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-24, November.
    14. Nayak, Rajat & Karanth, Krithi K. & Dutta, Trishna & Defries, Ruth & Karanth, K. Ullas & Vaidyanathan, Srinivas, 2020. "Bits and pieces: Forest fragmentation by linear intrusions in India," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    15. Matthias Kalkuhl & Ottmar Edenhofer, 2017. "Ramsey meets Thünen: the impact of land taxes on economic development and land conservation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 24(2), pages 350-380, April.
    16. Taye, Fitalew Agimass & Folkersen, Maja Vinde & Fleming, Christopher M. & Buckwell, Andrew & Mackey, Brendan & Diwakar, K.C. & Le, Dung & Hasan, Syezlin & Ange, Chantal Saint, 2021. "The economic values of global forest ecosystem services: A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    17. Reed, James & van Vianen, Josh & Foli, Samson & Clendenning, Jessica & Yang, Kevin & MacDonald, Margaret & Petrokofsky, Gillian & Padoch, Christine & Sunderland, Terry, 2017. "Trees for life: The ecosystem service contribution of trees to food production and livelihoods in the tropics," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 62-71.
    18. Tanguy Bernard & Sylvie Lambert & Karen Macours & Margaux Vinez, 2023. "Impact of small farmers' access to improved seeds and deforestation in DR Congo," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    19. Santiago Izquierdo-Tort & Seema Jayachandran & Santiago Saavedra, 2024. "Redesigning payments for ecosystem services to increase cost-effectiveness," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-11, December.
    20. Fischer, Rico & Bohn, Friedrich & Dantas de Paula, Mateus & Dislich, Claudia & Groeneveld, Jürgen & Gutiérrez, Alvaro G. & Kazmierczak, Martin & Knapp, Nikolai & Lehmann, Sebastian & Paulick, Sebastia, 2016. "Lessons learned from applying a forest gap model to understand ecosystem and carbon dynamics of complex tropical forests," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 326(C), pages 124-133.

    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:gam:jlands:v:6:y:2017:i:4:p:84-:d:121296. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.