Non-market forest ecosystem services and decision support in Nordic countries

Filyushkina, Anna; Strange, Niels; Löf, Magnus; Ezebilo, Eugene E.; Boman, Mattias

doi:10.1080/02827581.2015.1079643

Cited by 27 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 92 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other ecosystem services are not sold on markets and are referred to as non-market ecosystem services e.g. recreation experience based on free access to recreation site, aesthetic experience and air and water purification (TEEB, 2010;Filyushkina et al, 2016). The economic value (i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Willingness to Pay for Maintenance of a Nature Conservation Area: A Case of Mount Wilhelm, Papua New Guinea

Ezebilo

2016

ASS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystem services that are not traded on markets contribute to human wellbeing however their economic value is not well known and research is required to reveal it. This paper reports on a study of willingness to pay (WTP) for the maintenance of Mount Wilhelm by urban residents and socio-economic factors influencing it. The possibility of developing an ecotourism strategy that could generate benefits for local are discussed. The data were obtained from questionnaire and personal interviews of residents of Kundiawa, which is the capital of Simbu Province, Papua New Guinea. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics and binary logit regression model. The results showed that 92% of the respondents were willing to pay for maintenance of Mount Wilhelm and they would pay an average of 7.4 Papua New Guinea Kina (US$ 2.5) each year. The respondents who belonged to high income group had the highest WTP, followed by those who were willing to give out part of their land for conservation. Approximately 62% of the respondents would pay ≥10 Papua New Guinea Kina (PGK), which is equivalent to the amount charged as access fee to Mount Wilhelm by the locals living around it. The willingness to pay ≥10 PGK was influenced by income, education, importance of forests and willingness to give up land for conservation. The findings will contribute to land use planning and design of nature-based recreation that meets societal demands.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Willingness to Pay for Maintenance of a Nature Conservation Area: A Case of Mount Wilhelm, Papua New Guinea

Ezebilo

2016

ASS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Biodiversity is a major global goal in nature conservation and has been assessed using a number of measures, such as endangered species, species richness, habitat indices, population varieties, gene pools, deadwood and habitat quality (Heink and Kowarik 2010;Filyushkina et al 2016). However, only a few biodiversity indicators have been empirically tested against the criteria for which they were purportedly chosen (Heink and Kowarik 2010).…”

Section: Sustainability Indicators Of the Forest Bioeconomy Ecologicamentioning

confidence: 99%

Indicators and tools for assessing sustainability impacts of the forest bioeconomy

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sustainable use of renewable resources has become an important issue worldwide in the move towards a less fossil-fuel-intensive future. Mainstream method for fulfilling this aim is to increase the share of renewable energy and materials to substitute fossil fuels and to become fully independent from fossil fuels over the long-term. However, the environmental sustainability of this endeavor has been questioned. In addition, economic and social sustainability issues are also much debated topics in this particular context. Forest resources are often thought to contribute partially to achieving a so-called "carbon-neutral society". In this review, we discuss sustainability issues of using forest biomass. We present several sustainability indicators for ecological, economic and social dimensions and discuss the issues in applying them in sustainability impact assessments (SIAs). We also present a number of tools and methods previously used in conducting SIAs. We approach our study from the perspective of the Finnish forestry; in addition, various aspects regarding the application of SIAs in a broader context are also presented. One of the key conclusions of the study is that although sufficient data are available to measure many indicators accurately, the impacts may be very difficult to assess (e.g. impact of greenhouse gases on biodiversity) for conducting a holistic SIA. Furthermore, some indicators, such as "biodiversity", are difficult to quantify in the first place. Therefore, a mix of different methods, such as Multi-criteria Assessment, Life-cycle Assessment or Cost-Benefit Analysis, as well as different approaches (e.g. thresholds and strong/weak sustainability) are needed in aggregating the results of the impacts. SIAs are important in supporting and improving the acceptability of decision-making, but a certain degree of uncertainty will always have to be tolerated. Highlights:•Forest bioeconomy involves a range of multidimensional impacts.•A variety of methods exist to assess and evaluate sustainability.•Social sustainability is the most case-specific dimension to assess.•Indicators used in SIAs need case-specific considerations.•More consistency is needed regarding the concept and terminology of sustainability.

show abstract

“…Swallow et al (1997) extended that model to optimise management of the entire ecosystem, i.e., considering management of all stands as endogenous. While the importance of developing decision support tools for forest ecosystem management has long been recognised, spatial and temporal modelling remains a challenge (Filyushkina et al 2015). Most models that attempt to include spatial and temporal considerations in the analysis of the provision of multiple services generally apply mathematical programming methods (e.g., Bagdon et al 2016).…”

Section: From Stand Level To Multiple-use Forestry Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How does economic research contribute to the management of forest ecosystem services?

Garcia

Abildtrup

Stenger

2018

Annals of Forest Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

& Key message More and more environmental and resource economists are taking a particular interest in research on forest ecosystem services (FES), especially in a context of climate change. Spatial and temporal issues are crucial to economic analyses and for the design of conservation policies. Interdisciplinary research involving ecological and economic disciplines is a prerequisite for the more effective management of forest ecosystems. & Context Economists define non-market ecosystem services (ES) as public or common goods due to their characteristics of non-rivalry in terms of consumption and/or non-excludability. Just because they do not have a price does not mean that ES have no economic value because their social benefits are undoubtedly considerable. These features, associated with the market demand for timber and a poor climate risk assessment, may lead to the under-provision of non-market forest ES and the over-harvesting of timber. & Aims In this article, we review research questions that are central to the enhancement of FES provision. Beyond the economic modelling of the joint provision of FES, we focus on issues related to the design of public policies to guide forest management. The objective is to provide crucial insights concerning the importance of a spatial and sustainable provision of FES. & Results First, we provide an economic interpretation of the FES concept and a review of economic models of forest management. Second, we explain how spatial and temporal dimensions of FES can have major implications on their supply and demand. Both dimensions explain why FESs have to be taken into account in production decisions and public policies (including the design of payment for environmental services (PESs)). & Conclusion A better understanding of FES provision and public policies to be enhanced is not possible without accounting for spatial and temporal dimensions. This helps to analyse the impact of intervention on FES and the cost-effectiveness of economic instruments, implying a coordinated effort to bring together ecological and economic data and models.

show abstract

Non-market forest ecosystem services and decision support in Nordic countries

Cited by 27 publications

References 92 publications

Willingness to Pay for Maintenance of a Nature Conservation Area: A Case of Mount Wilhelm, Papua New Guinea

Willingness to Pay for Maintenance of a Nature Conservation Area: A Case of Mount Wilhelm, Papua New Guinea

Indicators and tools for assessing sustainability impacts of the forest bioeconomy

How does economic research contribute to the management of forest ecosystem services?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About