Next Article in Journal
Strategies to Combat Mycosphaerella Leaf Disease in Eucalyptus globulus Plantations in Northern Spain
Previous Article in Journal
350 Years of Fire-Climate-Human Interactions in a Great Lakes Sandy Outwash Plain
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Forests 2016, 7(9), 191; doi:10.3390/f7090191

Eliminating Illegal Timber Consumption or Production: Which Is the More Economical Means to Reduce Illegal Logging?

1,2
,
3,* , 1,2
,
1,2
and
1,2,*
1
College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
2
Research Center for Economics and Trade in Forest Products of the State Forestry Administration, Nanjing 210037, China
3
Research Institute of Forestry Policy and Information, China Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editors: Thomas J. Straka and Eric J. Jokela
Received: 26 April 2016 / Revised: 29 July 2016 / Accepted: 24 August 2016 / Published: 29 August 2016
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [2407 KB, uploaded 29 August 2016]   |  

Abstract

Illegal logging, with its related trade of illegally harvested timber, is one of the main environmental and economic problems worldwide. Eliminating illegal timber consumption and production are two practical means to reduce illegal logging. However, the problem of determining which of the two means is more economical remains to be analyzed. In this study, an input–output analysis was conducted to evaluate the consumption and production of illegal timber in different countries. The Global Forest Products Model (GFPM) was employed to analyze the effects of eliminating illegal timber consumption and production on the added value of the forest sector at global and national levels. Results indicated that eliminating illegal timber production is more economical than eliminating consumption at the global level. The former is estimated to decrease the added value of the global forest sector only by 3.37% compared to 7.31% by the latter in 2030. Eliminating the production of illegal timber will result in uneven distribution of social wealth in the forest sector, and will pass the cost of reducing illegal logging onto developing countries. Developed countries would gain more added value and market scale than the global average, whereas developing countries would suffer a loss if illegal timber production is eliminated. Hence, developed countries are encouraged to provide financial support to help developing countries reduce illegal logging. View Full-Text
Keywords: illegal logging; eliminating consumption; eliminating production; added value; input–output analysis; GFPM illegal logging; eliminating consumption; eliminating production; added value; input–output analysis; GFPM
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Supplementary material

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, X.; Xu, B.; Wang, L.; Yang, A.; Yang, H. Eliminating Illegal Timber Consumption or Production: Which Is the More Economical Means to Reduce Illegal Logging? Forests 2016, 7, 191.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Forests EISSN 1999-4907 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top