Elisabeth Veivåg Helseth , Pål Vedeld , Erik Gómez-Baggethun
{"title":"Balancing investments in ecosystem services for sustainable forest governance","authors":"Elisabeth Veivåg Helseth , Pål Vedeld , Erik Gómez-Baggethun","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103364","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Economic instruments like subsidies and tax reliefs are widely used to promote forest ecosystem services. However, such instruments typically target services traded in markets, whereas non-market services are declining worldwide. With Norway as a case, we map economic instruments used in Norwegian forest governance and examine how they promote or constrain forests' capacity to provide different ecosystem services. Data was collected from a review of policy documents and fiscal budgets, compared with data on trends and condition of ecosystem services from Norwegian forests. Three main results are highlighted. First, the main economic instruments are markets for forest products and amenities, forestry certification schemes, and government expenditures. Second, ecosystem services traded in markets like timber (578 mill €/y) and hunting licenses (74.1 mill €/y) attract the lion's share of forest investments, amounting to around 652.1 mill. Euros per year, whereas aggregated investments in non-market ecosystem services like habitat provision (43.44 mill €/y) and carbon sequestration (2.53 mill €/y) remain an order of magnitude smaller. Third, most instruments target services for which forests show increasing capacity, while some services in poor condition or declining supply, are underprioritized or undermined through investments in competing services. Moreover, our results suggest that the current use of economic instruments primarily aligns with the sustainability pathways of <em>green economy/green growth</em> or <em>nature protection</em>. We argue that sustainable forest governance in Norway will require major reallocations of investments to support a broader array of forest values, combined with policy attention to alternative sustainability pathways.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":"169 ","pages":"Article 103364"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Policy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124002181","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Economic instruments like subsidies and tax reliefs are widely used to promote forest ecosystem services. However, such instruments typically target services traded in markets, whereas non-market services are declining worldwide. With Norway as a case, we map economic instruments used in Norwegian forest governance and examine how they promote or constrain forests' capacity to provide different ecosystem services. Data was collected from a review of policy documents and fiscal budgets, compared with data on trends and condition of ecosystem services from Norwegian forests. Three main results are highlighted. First, the main economic instruments are markets for forest products and amenities, forestry certification schemes, and government expenditures. Second, ecosystem services traded in markets like timber (578 mill €/y) and hunting licenses (74.1 mill €/y) attract the lion's share of forest investments, amounting to around 652.1 mill. Euros per year, whereas aggregated investments in non-market ecosystem services like habitat provision (43.44 mill €/y) and carbon sequestration (2.53 mill €/y) remain an order of magnitude smaller. Third, most instruments target services for which forests show increasing capacity, while some services in poor condition or declining supply, are underprioritized or undermined through investments in competing services. Moreover, our results suggest that the current use of economic instruments primarily aligns with the sustainability pathways of green economy/green growth or nature protection. We argue that sustainable forest governance in Norway will require major reallocations of investments to support a broader array of forest values, combined with policy attention to alternative sustainability pathways.
期刊介绍:
Forest Policy and Economics is a leading scientific journal that publishes peer-reviewed policy and economics research relating to forests, forested landscapes, forest-related industries, and other forest-relevant land uses. It also welcomes contributions from other social sciences and humanities perspectives that make clear theoretical, conceptual and methodological contributions to the existing state-of-the-art literature on forests and related land use systems. These disciplines include, but are not limited to, sociology, anthropology, human geography, history, jurisprudence, planning, development studies, and psychology research on forests. Forest Policy and Economics is global in scope and publishes multiple article types of high scientific standard. Acceptance for publication is subject to a double-blind peer-review process.