Forest Company Dependencies and Impacts on Ecosystem Services: Expert Perceptions from China

Abstract

Global awareness of sustainability issues is growing rapidly, and business organizations are called to address wider social and environmental concerns along with economic performance. However, limited systematic knowledge exists on the interactions between forest industries and natural ecosystems. We thus investigated the role of ecosystem services in the context of China's forest sector. A qualitative research approach was used to elicit company external expert viewpoints on the topic. Our analysis focused on three themes: (1) forest company dependencies and impacts on ecosystem services; (2) business risks arising from dependencies and impacts; and (3) risk response strategies. The interviewed 20 experts identified a series of forest company dependencies and impacts (including negative and positive impacts) on several ecosystem services. The extent of dependencies and impacts is largely influenced by the business portfolio of the company. The perceived business risks include intense competition and the consequently increasing price for natural resources, which would affect forest company business plans, costs and outputs. The suggested strategies for turning risks into opportunities include outsourcing wood, changing production focus, promoting industrial upgrading and implementing regular assessments of corporate dependencies and impacts on ecosystem services. The findings of our study can guide companies' decision-making in managing forest ecosystems sustainably.

Policy Recommendation from Stakeholders to Improve Forest Products Transportation: A Qualitative Study

“…This method has advantages over other qualitative techniques like focus group discussions because interviews allow more privacy and a safer atmosphere to talk on dedicated issues than the later; participants have more time to express their feelings and discuss the subject matters in detail as well [34]. Interviews were helpful for the triangulation of information gained from supplementary sources from phase 1, which ensured credibility of the study results [24].…”

Can Timber Houses Be Productively Faster to Build Than Other Buildings?

“…Our sample outperformed the precepts of Dworkin (2012) practically four times over, since 25 to 30 participants are recommended for a minimum sample size to meet redundancy and saturation in scientifi c studies by in-depth interviews. Compared to other serious sectoral surveys with face-to-face interviews for timber and forestry sectors (Toppinen et al 2011;Holopainen et al 2015;Wan et al, 2015;Giesekam et al, 2016;Wan et al, 2017;Hurmekoski et al, 2018;Toppinen et al, 2018, Arvola et al, 2019Toppinen et al, 2019;D'Amato et al, 2020;Karjalainen et al, 2021;Niu et al, 2021;Viholainen et al, 2021, andZhu andLo, 2021), our sampling was satisfi ed and results were validated due to a notable participation of respondents.…”

Life cycle assessment approach of silviculture and timber harvesting of Norway spruce – a case study in the Czech Republic

“…From this point of view, the very definition of the scope of the study in the context of the LCA method is already complex, not to mention that the different forest functions may significantly interact (Sacchelli and Bernetti, 2019). For instance, monoculture timber production forests can have a negative impact on biodiversity and on the fulfillment of many other services, such as water, esthetic, recreation value and erosion control (Felton et al, 2016;Wan et al, 2017). Similarly, the timber-production ecosystem service of forests can be negatively affected by, for example, excessive of game animals for hunting (Ward and Williams, 2020), overabundant forest fruit picking, and intensive forest tourism (Price, 1987;Font and Tribe, 2000) can destruct the quantity and quality of woody tree regeneration.…”