IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/widerw/295324.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Tree Plantations in the Philippines and Thailand Economic, Social and Environmental Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Niskanen, Anssi
  • Saastamoinen, Olli

Abstract

The area of forest plantations in the tropics has increased for many reasons, but not the least as a result of natural forest depletion. Although forest plantations cannot qualitatively substitute the timber grown in natural forests, their importance in global forestry is steadily increasing. At the same time a heated public debate has been growing with them, focusing largely on the perceived negative environmental and social impacts of large-scale industrial plantations. This research report first discusses tropical plantations in global forestry. It emphasizes that tree plantations presently include much a wider range of categories, purposes, species variety and management forms than is commonly perceived. The study states that although industrial forest plantations are mainly established solely for economic reasons, private farm-forestry and governmental plantations more often have a variety of reasons for establishment. These reasons include expectations for positive social and environmental impacts of forest plantations, e.g. increased household security and soil conservation. Nevertheless the environmental and social impacts of plantations deserve much concern and the second part of the study widely reviews environmental and social but also economic impacts of plantations, all of which can be either negative or positive. One of the major problems in developing plantation forestry has been that the profitability analysis of plantations has based only on the economic criteria. Although financial profitability can be regarded as the most important single evaluation criteria for forest plantations in the tropics, the negative and positive social and environmental impacts should also be attempted to be included into the analysis. The focus of the empirical part of the work, therefore, has been to study to what extent it presently is possible to monetize the varying impacts of tree plantations and incorporate them into the "multilevel" profitability analysis. In two case study countries, Thailand and the Philippines, the profitability of industrial, community based and private reforestation was assessed for two most commonly used tree species in reforestation. The profitability assessments were aimed to be carried out at four different levels: based on comparisons between costs and benefits in market prices (financial profitability), economic efficiency prices (economic profitability), economic efficiency prices with the distributional weigh assessments (socio-economic profitability), and finally with including monetary valuation of environmental impacts into the economic analysis (environmental-economic profitability). For the environmental-economic profitability, the study evaluated the economic costs of transpiration and nutrient loss in harvesting, and benefits in erosion control and carbon sequestration. The results of the two case studies indicated that the economic profitability of reforestation is considerably higher than the financial profitability both in Thailand and the Philippines. It also became evident that the environmental-economic profitability was highly dependent on the environmental impact and valuation assessments; in this study, the environmental-economic valuation improved the economic profitability of reforestation. A conclusion derived from the socio-economic analysis was that the return to labour per hectare is very low in mechanized reforestation. The empirical basis of including environmental and social impacts into traditional profitability analysis of tree plantations requires much improvement and the work done still carries a character of methodological experiments. Nevertheless a conclusion is evident: if the social and environmental costs and benefits, evaluated in monetary terms, could properly be included into the solid framework of economic analysis, that would further encourage for environmentally and socially sensitive management practices in plantation forest development.

Suggested Citation

  • Niskanen, Anssi & Saastamoinen, Olli, "undated". "Tree Plantations in the Philippines and Thailand Economic, Social and Environmental Evaluation," WIDER Working Papers 295324, United Nations University, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:widerw:295324
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.295324
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/295324/files/RFA30.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.295324?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:phd:pjdevt:jpd_1988_vol__xv_no__1-c is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Falk Ita & Mendelsohn Robert, 1993. "The Economics of Controlling Stock Pollutants: An Efficient Strategy for Greenhouse Gases," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 76-88, July.
    3. Roger Sedjo & Joe Wisniewski & Alaric Sample & John Kinsman, 1995. "The economics of managing carbon via forestry: Assessment of existing studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(2), pages 139-165, September.
    4. repec:phd:pjdevt:jpd_1988_vol__xv_no__1-d is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Michael Schauer, 1995. "Estimation of the greenhouse gas externality with uncertainty," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(1), pages 71-82, January.
    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. Ruiz Estrada, Mario Arturo, 2013. "The Macroeconomics evaluation of Climate Change Model (MECC-Model): The case Study of China," MPRA Paper 49158, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Aug 2013.
    2. Jie Yan & Ruiliang Wang, 2024. "Green Fiscal and Tax Policies in China: An Environmental Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-24, April.
    3. Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2003. "Regulating stock externalities under uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2, Supple), pages 416-432, March.
    4. Howard, Peter H. & Sylvan, Derek, 2015. "The Economic Climate: Establishing Consensus on the Economics of Climate Change," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205761, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Juan Carlos Bárcena-Ruiz, 2006. "Environmental Taxes and First-Mover Advantages," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 35(1), pages 19-39, September.
    6. Benford, Frank A., 1998. "On the Dynamics of the Regulation of Pollution: Incentive Compatible Regulation of a Persistent Pollutant," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 1-25, July.
    7. Nathaniel O. Keohane & Benjamin Van Roy & Richard J. Zeckhauser, 2000. "Controlling Stocks and Flows to Promote Quality: The Environment, With Applications to Physical and Human Capital," NBER Working Papers 7727, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Vollebergh, Herman, 1997. "Environmental externalities and social optimality in biomass markets: waste-to-energy in The Netherlands and biofuels in France," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 605-621, May.
    9. Tarui, Nori, 2002. "Intertemporal Permit Trading For Stock Pollutants With Uncertainty," Working Papers 14431, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.
    10. Tol, Richard S.J., 2024. "A meta-analysis of the total economic impact of climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    11. Hans Gersbach & Noemi Hummel & Ralph Winkler, 2011. "Sustainable Climate Treaties," Diskussionsschriften dp1105, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    12. Rubio, Santiago & Fisher, Anthony, 1994. "Optimal Capital Accumulation and Stock Pollution: The Greenhouse Effect," CUDARE Working Papers 198637, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    13. Richard S.J. Tol, 2021. "Estimates of the social cost of carbon have not changed over time," Working Paper Series 0821, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    14. Mason, Charles F. & Polasky, Stephen & Tarui, Nori, 2017. "Cooperation on climate-change mitigation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 43-55.
    15. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Eagle, Alison J. & Manley, James G. & Smolak, Tara M., 2004. "How Costly Are Carbon Offsets? A Meta-Analysis Of Carbon Forest Sinks," Working Papers 18166, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    16. McKenney, Daniel W. & Yemshanov, Denys & Fox, Glenn & Ramlal, Elizabeth, 2004. "Cost estimates for carbon sequestration from fast growing poplar plantations in Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 345-358, June.
    17. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Sohngen, Brent, 2007. "Economics of Forest Ecosystem Carbon Sinks: A Review," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 1(3), pages 237-269, September.
    18. Ralph Winkler, 2008. "Optimal control of pollutants with delayed stock accumulation," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 08/91, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    19. Gersbach, Hans & Winkler, Ralph, 2011. "International emission permit markets with refunding," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(6), pages 759-773, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Development;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:widerw:295324. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/widerfi.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.