IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wfo/monber/y2026i2p37-46.html

Schutzwälder in Österreich. Volkswirtschaftliche Bedeutung und Optionen zur Verbesserung der Governance

Author

Listed:
  • Hans Pitlik

    (WIFO)

  • Franz Sinabell

Abstract

Wälder erfüllen in Österreich vielfältige Funktionen. Volkswirtschaftliche Betrachtungen berücksichtigen oft lediglich die Holzproduktion, während andere Nutzendimensionen außen vor bleiben. Eine wichtige Funktion der Wälder ist der Schutz vor Naturgefahren. So schützen 16% der österreichischen Waldfläche direkt Objekte wie Gebäude und technische Infrastruktur vor Lawinen, Steinschlag und flachgründigen Rutschungen. Aufgrund des mangelhaften Zustandes vieler Schutzwälder ist ihr Schutzpotenzial jedoch begrenzt. Unter der Annahme einer hohen Schutzwirkung und basierend auf Berechnungen des Bundesforschungszentrums für Wald wurden die potenziell von Wäldern geschützten Teile des österreichischen Bundesgebietes identifiziert. Die Schätzung der Wertschöpfung stützt sich auf feingliedrige regionalökonomische Daten. Der unbefriedigende Zustand vieler Schutzwälder resultiert aus verbesserungsfähigen Anreizstrukturen in der Governance lokaler öffentlicher Güter, die ein Trittbrettfahrerverhalten fördern. Als ein Lösungsansatz, um die Qualität der Schutzwälder zu verbessern und deren potenzielle Schutzwirkung zu heben, wird eine Stärkung der lokalen Entscheidungsstrukturen vorgeschlagen.

Suggested Citation

  • Hans Pitlik & Franz Sinabell, 2026. "Schutzwälder in Österreich. Volkswirtschaftliche Bedeutung und Optionen zur Verbesserung der Governance," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 99(1), pages 37-46, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wfo:monber:y:2026:i:2:p:37-46
    Note: With English abstract.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.wifo.ac.at/?p=439848
    File Function: abstract
    Download Restriction: Payment required
    ---><---

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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Healy, Andrew & Malhotra, Neil, 2009. "Myopic Voters and Natural Disaster Policy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(3), pages 387-406, August.
    2. Getzner, Michael & Gutheil-Knopp-Kirchwald, Gerlinde & Kreimer, Elisabeth & Kirchmeir, Hanns & Huber, Michael, 2017. "Gravitational natural hazards: Valuing the protective function of Alpine forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 150-159.
    3. Ellingsen, Tore, 1998. "Externalities vs internalities: a model of political integration," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 251-268, May.
    4. John G. Head, 1977. "Public Goods:The Polar Case Reconsidered," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 53(2), pages 227-238, June.
    5. Weiss, Gerhard, 2000. "Evaluation of policy instruments for protective forest management in Austria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3-4), pages 243-255, December.
    6. repec:bla:ecorec:v:53:y:1977:i:142&143:p:227-38 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    8. Alix-Garcia, Jennifer & Wolff, Hendrik, 2014. "Payment for Ecosystem Services from Forests," IZA Discussion Papers 8179, IZA Network @ LISER.
    9. Jennifer Alix-Garcia & Hendrik Wolff, 2014. "Payment for Ecosystem Services from Forests," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 361-380, October.
    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. Sims, Katharine R.E. & Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M., 2017. "Parks versus PES: Evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 8-28.
    2. Samuel D. Bell & Nadia A. Streletskaya, 2019. "The Random Quantity Mechanism: Laboratory and Field Tests of a Novel Cost-Revealing Procurement Mechanism," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(3), pages 899-921, July.
    3. Gabriela Simonet & Julie Subervie & Driss Ezzine-De-Blas & Marina Cromberg & Amy Duchelle, 2015. "Paying smallholders not to cut down the amazon forest: impact evaluation of a REDD+ pilot project," Working Papers 1514, Chaire Economie du climat.
    4. Delacote, Philippe & Robinson, Elizabeth J.Z. & Roussel, Sébastien, 2016. "Deforestation, leakage and avoided deforestation policies: A spatial analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 192-210.
    5. Shyamsundar, Priya & Ahlroth, Sofia & Kristjanson, Patricia & Onder, Stefanie, 2020. "Supporting pathways to prosperity in forest landscapes – A PRIME framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    6. Long, Yanxu, 2024. "Invest in Green, Earn the Gold: Payment for Ecosystem Services, Reforestation and Rural Livelihoods," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 343872, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Harzer, Sophie & Quaas, Martin F., 2026. "Differentiated vs. homogeneous payments for biodiversity conservation — Microeconomic theory and systematic literature review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    8. Arriagada, Rodrigo & Villaseñor, Adrián & Rubiano, Eliana & Cotacachi, David & Morrison, Judith, 2018. "Analysing the impacts of PES programmes beyond economic rationale: Perceptions of ecosystem services provision associated to the Mexican case," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 116-127.
    9. Nicolas Quérou & Antoine Soubeyran & Raphael Soubeyran, 2020. "Contracting under unverifiable monetary costs," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 892-909, October.
    10. Saarimaa, Tuukka & Tukiainen, Janne, 2015. "Common pool problems in voluntary municipal mergers," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 140-152.
    11. Jing Gong & Hongyan Du & Zhi Wang, 2022. "Analysis of the Influences of Ecological Compensation Projects on Transfer Employment of Rural Labor from the Perspective of Capability," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-14, September.
    12. Nicolas Quérou & Antoine Soubeyran & Raphael Soubeyran, 2015. "Moral hazard and capability," Working Papers hal-02795218, HAL.
    13. Gradstein, Mark, 2004. "Political Bargaining in a Federation: Buchanan meets Coase," CEPR Discussion Papers 4188, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Hitayezu, Patrick & Wale, Edilegnaw & Ortmann, Gerald, 2015. "Assessing Agricultural Land Use Change in the Midlands Region of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: Application of Mixed-Multinomial Logit," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211736, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Cisneros, Elías & Börner, Jan & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2022. "Impacts of conservation incentives in protected areas: The case of Bolsa Floresta, Brazil," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    16. Benra, F. & Nahuelhual, L. & Felipe-Lucia, M. & Jaramillo, A. & Jullian, C. & Bonn, A., 2022. "Balancing ecological and social goals in PES design – Single objective strategies are not sufficient," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    17. repec:ags:cfcp15:344408 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Anke S. Kessler & Christoph Luelfesmann & Gordon M. Myers, 2007. "Federations, Constitutions, and Political Bargaining," Discussion Papers dp07-19, Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University.
    19. Santiago Lago-Peñas & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez & Agnese Sacchi, 2022. "Country performance during the Covid-19 pandemic: externalities, coordination, and the role of institutions," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 17-31, March.
    20. Campanhão, Ligia Maria Barrios & Ranieri, Victor Eduardo Lima, 2019. "Guideline framework for effective targeting of payments for watershed services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 93-109.
    21. Rueda, Ximena, 2024. "Financial instruments, smallholders and the global commons: Opportunities for transformative change in uncertain times," IAAE 2024 Conference, August 2-7, 2024, New Delhi, India 344408, International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE).

    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:wfo:monber:y:2026:i:2:p:37-46. 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: Florian Mayr (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wifooat.html .

    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.