IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/helsec/491.html

Forest Conservation - Too Much or Too Little? A Political Economy Model

Author

Listed:
  • Eerola, E.

Abstract

This paper studies the formation of forest conservation policy when the government is influenced by an environmental lobby and an industrial lobby representing a non-competitive forest industry. Lobbying is modelled as a common agency game which is extended to allow for asymmetries in lobbying technologies. When the forest product is exported the politically determined conservation policy always departs from the socially optimal policy in favor of the more efficient lobby. But when the forest product is destined for domestic markets conservation may ve excessive from the social point of view even though the industrial lobby has more efficient lobbying technology than the environmental lobby.

Suggested Citation

  • Eerola, E., 2000. "Forest Conservation - Too Much or Too Little? A Political Economy Model," University of Helsinki, Department of Economics 491, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:fth:helsec:491
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gaoussou DIARRA & Sébastien MARCHAND, 2011. "Does Pervasive Corruption Matter For Firm's Demand for Good Governance in Developing Countries?," Working Papers 201112, CERDI.
    2. Mallard, Graham, 2019. "Regulating whale watching: A common agency analysis," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 191-199.
    3. Qianqian Shao & Thorsten Janus & Maarten J. Punt & Justus Wesseler, 2018. "The Conservation Effects of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Biased Policymakers," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.
    4. Qianqian Shao & Dusan Drabik & Marnus Gouse & Justus Wesseler, 2020. "Food self-sufficiency and GM regulation under conflicting interests: the case of GM maize in South Africa," Agrekon, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(1), pages 110-128, January.
    5. Marchand, Sébastien, 2016. "The colonial origins of deforestation: an institutional analysis," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(3), pages 318-349, June.
    6. Laing, Timothy & Palmer, Charles, 2015. "Economy-wide impacts of REDD when there is political influence," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 107-126.
    7. Graham Mallard, 2014. "Static Common Agency And Political Influence: An Evaluative Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 17-35, February.
    8. Philippe Delacote, 2011. "How concessions’ size may influence systemic corruption in forest harvesting: A theoretical assessment," Working Papers - Cahiers du LEF 2011-05, Laboratoire d'Economie Forestiere, AgroParisTech-INRA.
    9. Sébastien MARCHAND, 2010. "Historical and Comparative Institutional Analysis: Evidences from Deforestation," Working Papers 201016, CERDI.
    10. Isabelle Cadoret & Fabio Padovano, 2018. "Derterminants and consequences of the stringency of environmental policies: an empirical test," Economics Working Paper from Condorcet Center for political Economy at CREM-CNRS 2018-04-ccr, Condorcet Center for political Economy.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry

    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:fth:helsec:491. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/valhefi.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.