Adding Value to Wood-Based Products: A Systematic Literature Review on Drivers

Abstract

The term “added value” is frequently used by stakeholders in the forest wood sector. However, beyond its intuitive meaning, what does “added value” mean in economics, and what are the main ways of adding value to wood-based products? To answer these questions, a theoretical framework of the concept of “added value” and an overview of its main applications within wood supply chains are provided. Subsequently, the results of a systematic literature review are reported. A total of 1974 primary research articles published in English in the last decade were collected from the Scopus and Web of Science databases. The main objectives were to understand how the “added value” concept is addressed, determine which wood-based products are studied, identify how value is added, and ascertain the main consequences. The analysis of the 111 selected articles showed that the term “added value” is often used as a label rather than a clearly defined concept. Improved production processes and the valorisation of raw materials were found to be the main methods of adding value to wood-based products, while environmental benefits emerged as the most frequent objective. The findings may serve several purposes, such as identifying research needs, guiding industrial innovation, and informing policy makers, helping to implement measures that really benefit wood supply chains. Building on this study, future research could explore how added value is perceived and implemented by forest enterprises, wood industries, policymakers, and other stakeholders. This would provide a broader reference framework for applying the concept of added value.

1. Introduction

Whether used by academics, industry agents, members of institutions, or other stakeholders, terms such as “added value”, “value chain”, and “valorisation” are frequently encountered in the wood sector. Yet, they tend to be used only as labels, without further clarification. This can be attributed to the fact that such terms have a positive, intuitive meaning that contributes to their use as buzzwords. However, the economic concept of added value is far from simple and encompasses several aspects, ranging from the competitive advantages associated with it to how it is interpreted by managers and customers [1].

This review addresses the strategic importance of adding value to wood-based products. The analysis begins with a theoretical framework of the concept of “added value” from an economic perspective and then moves on to relevant cases in wood supply chains. Subsequently, the results of a systematic review are presented. The review was structured such that it would allow us to examine how the scientific literature on wood-based products addresses the concept of added value, which products are considered, what technologies and methods are used to enhance value, and what the key consequences are (see Section 1.3). These aspects are interconnected by two main affordances. First, they provide a comprehensive overview of the primary drivers influencing the topic, offering a valuable foundation for future research. Second, they assess how the scientific literature supports the implementation of added value throughout wood supply chains. A lack of attention to this issue could limit tangible impacts, which may be particularly crucial for certain supply chains, such as those operating at a local level or relying on low-quality wood raw material.

This knowledge can guide the definition of research needs, targeting the development of wood-based products and the study of their properties. It can also help enhance the competitiveness of wood industries through diversification, innovation, and the improvement of established processes and products. Finally, it can support interaction with policy makers, helping to implement measures that can generate added value and have a positive impact on stakeholders.

Table 1. List of abbreviations used.

Abbreviation	Terms
CLT	Cross-Laminated Timber
DfD	Designed for Disassembly
EVA	Economic Value Added
GLT	Glue-Laminated Timber
GVC	Global Value Chain
OSB	Oriented Strand Board
PICO	Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome
PERVAL	Perceived value
PRISMA	Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
SMEs	Small and medium-sized enterprises
RBV	Resource-based view
SFO	Sustainable Forest Operations
TCV	Theory of consumption values
WPC	Wood–plastic composites
W-PU	Wood–polyurethane

lists the abbreviations used throughout this paper.

1.1. Added Value: A Theoretical Overview

Before we define added value, it is essential to define the concept of value itself, regardless of the specific sector and products. Historically, value has been formally divided into two primary components: exchange value (monetary value) and perceived utility value [2]. Over the centuries, scholars have provided various definitions of value [3] in accordance with the prevailing economic theory of the time, resulting in a lack of a clear and unambiguous definition [4]. In business strategy studies, value has been defined based on the buyer’s willingness to pay [5]. In pricing studies, since the late 1980s, value has been characterised by a two-way definition that considers both the utility derived from the purchase of a good and the sacrifices incurred to obtain it [6]. In this case, value is defined as potential before purchase and actual afterwards [7]. In consumer behaviour studies, value has been defined in terms of desirability and necessity [1].

These latter aspects introduce another concept: perceived value. This has been analysed in the literature through various approaches [8], among the most relevant of which is the theory of consumption values (TCV) proposed by Sheth et al. [9]. This model explains the consequences of consumer choice, identifying five different values: functional (i.e., the tangible attributes and functional role of a product), social (i.e., the sense of belonging to one or more social groups), emotional (i.e., the inspiration generated by affective ties and feelings), circumstantial (i.e., contextual factors influencing consumption), and epistemic (i.e., the ability to satisfy novelty or curiosity). Based on TCV, Sweeney and Soutar [10] later developed a multiple-item scale for measuring perceived value (PERVAL).

In this study, we consider the formation of a product’s sale price based on consumer-perceived value rather than production costs. We therefore use Lind’s [11] definition of added value as a starting point: “The difference between the selling price of a good and its production cost”. However, it should be emphasised that a change in production processes, such as process or product innovation, does not necessarily lead to an increase in added value [12] unless these changes are perceived as valuable by the consumer [13]. Levitt’s [14] concept of “augmentation” is emblematic in this respect: the addition of features that the consumer does not think about may not enhance perceived value if these extra features are not utilised or recognised. In some cases, these features may even diminish the previous offering’s value [15]. Conversely, in the case of customer delight, modifications that exceed the consumer’s basic expectations can generate a positive perception, adding value by increasing willingness to pay and the sale price [16].

Added value can be modified by expanding the perceived benefits or reducing perceived sacrifices associated with purchasing a product [15,17]. Benefits encompass a multidimensional construct, including functional, economic, and social aspects, while sacrifices refer to both the effort required at the time of purchase and the perceived risks associated with the long-term implications of owning durable goods [18,19]. Additionally, as mentioned earlier, intangible assets, such as knowledge, relationships, and innovations, can contribute to added value [20].

A distinction must be made between the terms “added value” and “value-added”, as they are often mistakenly used as synonyms in the literature. The latter, however, has a specific meaning in accounting [21], particularly in relation to performance indicators, such as Economic Value Added (EVA) [22], which measures a firm’s value creation.

Value creation occurs when companies start delivering value to clients [23]. This concept forms the basis for business model development and, according to De Martino [24], can be analysed from two perspectives: the supply-chain one, based on shareholder theory [25,26], in which firms create value for consumers while maximising shareholder interests, and the sustainability-based perspective, based on stakeholder theory [27,28], in which firms extend responsibility to employees, suppliers, and society at large.

Within the supply chain perspective, there are two possible theoretical foundations: the resource-based view (RBV) [29], which attributes value creation and competitive advantage to a firm’s internal capabilities and resources; and Porter’s [30] generic strategies, which associate value creation and competitive advantage with specific actions, such as cost reduction (i.e., cost leadership) or the differentiation of goods.

In recent decades, the concept of value creation has extended beyond the individual firm to encompass the entire value chain, including suppliers and consumers. This evolution has introduced new value concepts such as value constellation [31], value co-production [32], and shared value [24,31]. In this regard, another perspective on added value comes from game theory; in particular, it relates to examining a firm’s position within the value chain and the market. A firm’s added value, and thus its competitive advantage, is determined by the difference between the total value created in the market, including its contribution, and the total value created in its absence [33].

1.2. Adding Value to Wood-Based Products

The opportunities for adding value to wood-based products can be examined by considering the different stages of their life cycles [34]. With reference to the main methods of adding value discussed in Section 1.1, the following overview starts from forest growth and proceeds to address forest operations, first and second processing, marketing, performance in end uses, and recycling, reuse, and disposal. This presentation style is intended to outline the main drivers while presenting some relevant recent examples.

Regarding forest growth, silvicultural practices are crucial for creating or maintaining the value of wood as a raw material and can have several purposes such as favouring more valuable species, optimising the yield of specific assortments, and ensuring a constant supply over time [35]. Silviculture affects multiple wood characteristics related to mechanical and aesthetic quality, including dimensions, growth ring width, knot size, and grain slope. The presence and extent of these characteristics determine the suitability of raw timber for different products and uses, leading to significant differences in assortment value. For example, sweet chestnut silvicultural techniques aimed at reducing the occurrence of ring shake are essential to producing logs suitable for structural beams, thereby limiting the amount of wood relegated to lower-value uses such as poles or tannin extraction [36]. Similar considerations apply to arboriculture, where proper management can optimise plantations’ profitability, especially when logs are intended for rotary cutting or veneer slicing.

The certification of sustainable forest management is another element that can enhance the value of wood-based products by improving sustainability credentials and increasing trade appeal. Various studies have demonstrated that forest certification can yield several benefits, particularly in terms of access to new markets, export competitiveness, and corporate image [37]. However, some cases have reported unsatisfactory results from forest certification, including issues such as unmet managerial expectations, trade barrier effects, and low or non-existent premium prices acknowledged by the market [38]. Therefore, the actual economic value added by forest certification should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, depending on specific market contexts.

Forest operations play a crucial role through the identification and preservation of the quality of the timber assortments to be extracted. According to Marchi et al. [39], quality optimisation is one of the pillars of the modern concept of Sustainable Forest Operations (SFOs), together with environmental, ergonomic, economic, and societal considerations. In particular, quality should be optimised through the correct assessment of the assortment and its optimal bucking and preserved by operations aimed at ensuring future yields. The level of mechanisation and the competence of forest operators are key factors, as they can impact timber value and productivity by tens of percentage points [40].

Operator competence is also fundamental during the first and second processing of wood products [41]. Its influence is particularly significant in complex manufacturing processes, where production equipment also plays a crucial role. A relevant example is the Industry 4.0 approach, which focuses on implementing digital productive technologies, such as Smart and Cloud-Based Manufacturing, particularly within a circular economy framework [42]. In fact, the concept of added value extends beyond production processes to the entire organisation. In this regard, ISO 9001 [43] explicitly states that its process-based approach, founded on the plan–do–check–act cycle and risk-based thinking, enables organisations to consider processes in terms of added value.

Regarding wood products, added value can be categorised into two broad areas. The first involves maintaining or enhancing the inherent properties of wood. For example, strength grading allows timber to be used in structural applications, while surface treatments enhance its aesthetic appeal. The second involves adding new properties to wood and its derivatives. Examples include modification processes that improve the natural durability of low-durability wood and the layered composition of thermal insulation panels. Such strategies are often essential to enable wood to compete with alternative, higher-performing materials, ultimately unlocking the environmental benefits associated with its use. Notably, adding value is not necessarily linked to innovation, although the two concepts are frequently associated. For example, Oriented Strand Board (OSB) and other wood-based panels are specifically designed to add value to low-quality wood, and, at the same time, they are well-established products.

Marketing is another key factor in adding value to wood-based products. Large companies in the wood sector typically have well-structured marketing departments focusing on modern strategies for product valorisation, customer satisfaction, and brand perception [44]. In contrast, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) often have underdeveloped marketing strategies [45]. Improvements can be pursued at various levels within SME supply chains. Some examples include increasing profit efficiency by selling timber at more advanced processing stages, improving promotional materials and online presence, and adopting more analytical approaches to market segmentation and customer care.

In recent years, sustainability has become a central theme in the marketing of wood-based products. Many promotional materials and company websites emphasise sustainability over the technical properties and intended uses of wood products. Furthermore, unlike many other materials, wood’s aesthetic appeal and the cultural traditions associated with its use can be effectively leveraged in marketing strategies. These aspects are frequently strong selling points for wood products across diverse sectors, ranging from construction and furniture to specific markets such as acoustic guitars [46].

Finally, end-of-life management and resource recovery contribute markedly to adding value by reducing environmental impacts. Wood’s biodegradable nature provides an intrinsic competitive advantage over many other materials. However, proper planning is required for these final stages, both at the individual product level and for entire structures, as seen in the emerging application of the Designed for Disassembly (DfD) concept in timber buildings [47].

Product design can also optimise the use of recycled wood as a secondary raw material, particularly by minimising the use of chemicals and adhesives. The increasing importance of recycled wood in the global market is paramount for reducing pressure on natural forests, given the growing demand [48]. The circular economy approach and the cascading use of wood are indeed essential strategies for optimising resource uses, reducing waste, and minimising environmental impacts. A notable example is the increasing incorporation of recycled wood in the wood-based-panel industry [49].

1.3. Research Questions

A systematic review was conducted to analyse how the concept of “added value” is considered in recent scientific articles on wood-based products. The primary aim was to answer the following research questions:

Q1: “How do scientific papers on wood-based products address the concept of ‘added value’?”

Q2: “What categories of wood-based products are being studied?”

Q3: “What technologies or methods are used to add value?”

Q4: “What are the main consequences of adding value to wood-based products?”

These questions were considered key for exploring the multifaceted nature of added value related to wood-based products. By answering them, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of the different dimensions through which value is addressed in scientific articles.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Search Strategy

This review adheres to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) [50] guidelines. The rationale for this review in the context of existing knowledge is presented in Section 1.1 and Section 1.2, while the objectives are reported above (Section 1.3) as research questions. The following subsections describe the systematic review process.

A literature search was conducted between November 2024 and December 2024, using the Scopus Elsevier and Web of Science databases. The search strategy focused on wood-based products’ characteristics and added value. Relevant keywords were identified and combined using Boolean operators (AND, OR) and wildcards (*). Specifically, the following research string was used: TITLE-ABS-KEY (“wood” OR “wood-based” OR “wood based”) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (“value-added” OR “add value” OR “adding value”) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (“valorization” OR “optimization” OR “properties” OR “characteristic*” OR “improvement” OR “advanc*” OR “develop*”) AND NOT ALL FIELDS (“bamboo” OR “palm”). The search was restricted to the “TITLE-ABS-KEY” field to ensure a focused exploration of relevant articles was conducted. Furthermore, the terms “bamboo” and “palm” were excluded to avoid results that could divert from the main research scope.

2.2. Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility criteria were determined using the PICO framework to ensure a systematic formulation of the research hypothesis and methodically establish the criteria listed in

Table 2. PICO elements.

PICO Element
Population (P)	Scientific papers on wood-based products
Intervention (I)	Elaboration of the concept of “added value”; innovative technologies or methods used to add value
Comparison (C)	“Added value” is mentioned but not elaborated
Outcome (O)	Definitions of the concept of “added value”; assessments of the different products studied and the approaches to adding value

. Studies that did not meet the PICO criteria were excluded. In case doubts were raised, full texts were screened to determine inclusion/exclusion. Additional inclusion criteria were added: (i) written in English, (ii) open-access primary research articles, and (iii) published within the last 11 years (this time span was chosen to provide a picture in line with current research trends, technological advancements, and testing methodologies).

2.3. Data Extraction

Article selection was carried out through an independent evaluation process by two researchers who worked independently. The selection process consisted of full-text reading. Data extraction was performed using a Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA) spreadsheet, where the following variables were collected from full-text articles: ID; title; author(s); year of publication; added value concept: label or elaborated; where value is added; wood-based products; product category; methods used to add value (relating to production processes, valorisation of raw material, product technology, sustainability, economic aspects, and social aspects); aspects of added value; and outcomes of adding value. To facilitate data extraction, the above variables were grouped into categories, which were then used to analyse the results (

Table 3. Extraction table: variables and categories.

Variables	Categories
ID, title, author(s), year of publication	N/A
Added value concept: label or elaborated	“Yes”, “No”, “Not explicitly”
Where value is added	“Wood-based product”, “Wood sector”
Wood-based products	“Biochar/Biomass”, “Packaging”, “Paper”, “Pellet”, “Solid wood”, “Wood extractives”, “GLT and CLT”, “Wood-based panel”, “Wood-based composite”, “Other products”, “N.D.—Not Determined”
Product category	“Structural”, “Not structural”, “Both”, “N.D.—Not Determined”
Methods used to add value	Production process: “Efficient silvicultural treatment”, “Alternative destination”, “Improving decision-making in production process” “Innovative production techniques”, “New product”, “Innovative pretreatment”, “Transformation of waste material” Valorisation of raw material: “Use of lesser-used woods”, “Use of local wood”, “Use of low quality wood”, “Use of secondary wood materials, “Use of waste material” Product technology: “Conferring new properties”, “Highlighting properties”, “Improvement of the properties” Sustainability: “Cascading use”, “LCA”, “Recycling”, “Substitution of over-exploited species”, “Use of alternative adhesives”, “Use of alternative varnishes”, “Use of local resources” Economic aspects: “Circular bioeconomy”, “Creation of short supply chains”, “Global value chain”, “Marketing and relational capital” Social aspects: “Collaboration and shared logic”, “Direct marketing and personal contact”
Aspects of added value	“Alternative destination”, “Conferring new properties”, “Economic benefits”, “Increased employment”, “New products”, “Quality/performance improvement”, “Sustainability”
Outcomes of adding value	“Economic benefits”, “Environmental benefits”, “New potential uses”, “New products”, “Product quality and performance”, “N.D.—Not Determined”

). The risk of bias for each included study was assessed by the researchers via double-checking after their independent evaluation process.

The last search on the databases was conducted on the 29th of December 2024 and identified 951 documents on Scopus and 1023 documents on Web of Science, yielding a total of 1974 records. Of these, 885 papers were removed because they were duplicates, 293 were excluded for not being primary research and/or open access, 27 were removed because they were not written in English, and 47 were excluded because they were published before 2014. Of the 722 remaining articles, 611 were removed after reading the titles and abstracts, as they did not meet the PICO eligibility criteria. As a result, 111 articles were selected for the qualitative analysis. The study selection process is illustrated in Figure 1.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Descriptive Analysis of the Reviewed Studies

The annual distribution of the reviewed articles reflects the evolving research focus on added value in regard to wood-based products from 2014 to 2025 (Figure 2). In the first five years, annual publications were limited (<6%), but their number increased markedly, peaking at 17.1% between 2022 and 2024, indicating a growing interest in the field. The decline in 2025 (0.9%) is due to the ongoing nature of this year, hindering a complete assessment of the publications.

Appendix A provides a detailed overview of the selected articles, including information on document type, geographical distribution, and the journals in which the articles were published. Of the 111 records analysed, only four are proceedings papers, while the rest are peer-reviewed scientific articles. Figure 3 shows the geographical distribution of the studies, with China contributing the most publications (17.1%), followed by Brazil (12.6%), Romania (8.1%), and the United States (8.1%). A large proportion of the publications (30.6%) originates from various countries, highlighting the global interest in this topic. As illustrated in Figure 4, 25.2% of the articles were published in Polymers and BioResources, followed by Maderas: Ciencia y Technologia and Forests, which accounted for 7.5% and 5.6%, respectively. The remaining articles are spread across various journals, reflecting the diversity of the places of publication.

3.2. “Added Value” Only as a Label or a Defined Concept

This review revealed that although the term “added value” is frequently used in the scientific literature, its definition is not elaborated upon in most studies. More than half of the reviewed papers (54.1%) lack an explicit definition, indicating that the term is often used as a label only, without further explanation. For example, the expression “value-added product” is often used simply to indicate the product itself. Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT) or veneers, for instance, are frequently labelled as higher-added-value products to distinguish them from other products such as wood pulp or biomass, without clarifying what constitutes the added value. This gap suggests a need for developing theoretical frameworks and standardised metrics to examine added value in greater depth. Such a framework could support the implementation of measures aimed at generating real impacts on wood supply chains.

In 22.5% of the studies, the concept can be better understood because, although not explicitly defined, its role is more relevant to the article and its meaning can be inferred from the context. However, this leaves room for misinterpretation due to the subjective interpretation of the information in the text.

In the remaining 23.4% of the reviewed studies, a specific definition of the concept is provided, which varies depending on the focus of the research. This reflects the multifaceted and complex nature of “added value”, which, in the analysed articles, is mostly related to economic, environmental, and product-specific aspects. In some cases, added value is described in economic terms, such as the increase in economic value resulting from labour and capital inputs during the production process [51]. Other studies define it in terms of sustainability, e.g., finding alternatives to fossil energy to contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions [52]. In other cases, aesthetic characteristics—especially the colour of wood—are considered the primary added value, enhancing the product’s appeal and perceived value [53].

Finally, although the search string was not strictly related to innovation, it is worth noting that the concept of “added value” is often confused with that of “innovation”. However, the latter refers to the development and introduction of novelties in a process, product, or service, whether new or existing [54]. On the other hand, “added value” in the wood sector is often related to the improvement of properties or performance with the aim of creating new business opportunities. In addition, it may also include intangible aspects (see “perceived value” in Section 1.1) that are not covered by innovation.

3.3. Product Category and Methods of Adding Value

In terms of intended use, 57.5% of the articles reviewed focus on non-structural products, 16.8% focus on structural products, and 25.7% do not clearly define the end use. The last category includes articles that address the wood sector in general terms or focus on laboratory-tested solid wood specimens. This issue is linked to the frequent use of “added value” as a generic label. Addressing it also requires a detailed consideration of specific products, their potential end uses, and comparisons with benchmark products.

Regarding the specific products (Figure 5), wood-based panels are the most frequently discussed, representing the content of 25.0% of the articles reviewed, followed by wood-based composites, such as wood–plastic composites (WPCs) or lightweight wood–polyurethane (W–PU) composite foams, which account for 22.3%. A total of 13.4% of the articles do not define the product category, as they focus more broadly on the wood sector. Biomass, particularly biochar, is addressed in 13.4% of the articles, while solid wood, including laboratory-tested specimens, accounts for 8%. Structural wood-based products, namely, Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT) and Glue-Laminated Timber (GLT), represent 7.1% of the articles. The remaining categories, each accounting for less than 3% of the articles, include paper, packaging, and specific wooden objects.

The fact that the concept of added value is predominantly addressed in non-structural products may be linked to the inherent perception of structural use as a way of adding value. Also, structural products typically must comply with broader regulatory and legislative frameworks [55]. This can hinder or at least slow down innovation at the product level. On the other hand, non-structural products are often subject to lighter restrictions, providing a more flexible and dynamic space for innovation. This facilitates the development of diverse and advanced solutions to meet new market demands.

Several methods for adding value to wood-based products are considered in the reviewed studies (Figure 6). A key approach, discussed in 35.2% of the studies, focuses on the implementation of innovative production processes, including enhanced decision-making during manufacturing and pre-treatment processes. Another common method, representing 30.1% of the studies, involves the valorisation of wood as a raw material. This adds value by using lesser-known or underutilised wood species, local timber, and wood as a secondary raw material. The aim of these approaches is to enhance sustainability by reducing dependence on over-exploited resources. Sustainability is specifically addressed in 15.7% of the studies, wherein added value is related to practices like recycling and promoting the cascading use of wood. In particular, the diversification of the end uses for wood waste or byproducts represent another key aspect. Traditional methods often involve incineration for power generation. However, redirecting wood residues towards alternative ends, such as biochar or new products, can offer interesting opportunities for adding value to the product [56,57].

Product properties and performance are considered in 13.9% of the studies. Pre-treatments, including chemical or thermal modification, are frequently investigated both to confer new features and improve some of the physical–mechanical characteristics of wood, particularly in terms of dimensional stability, strength, and durability. Wood modification is also proposed to facilitate the use of lower-quality or lesser-known species, thereby promoting a more efficient use of available wood resources [58,59].

Economic drivers that add value are discussed in 4.2% of the studies. These studies consider the principles of the circular economy and the enhancement of short timber supply chains along with the creation of a Global Value Chain (GVC). The economic approach typically extends beyond the individual product to encompass the entire industry, aiming to promote efficiency, enhance competitiveness, and foster business ecosystems [60].

Finally, 0.9% of the studies highlight the importance of social aspects. This is indeed a small fraction, especially when compared to the attention paid to social aspects by other scientific sectors such as agronomy [61]. Collaboration and shared decision-making among stakeholders as well as investment in human capital through training and skill development—especially in areas where manual work is crucial—are important factors in developing effective and sustainable drivers to add value and ensure there are benefits for all partners throughout a supply chain [62,63].

It is worth noting that the reviewed studies largely overlook the impact of workforce competence. This omission represents a significant gap, as human resources play a key role in enhancing added value [41]. This is particularly relevant for materials such as wood, which requires specialised expertise for optimal manufacturing and utilisation. Further research is necessary to better understand and support the role of workforce competence within wood supply chains.

Despite being distinct, the above methods of adding value are often interrelated. Innovations in one area frequently complement or enhance those in others, creating synergies across drivers. These interconnections become clearer when viewed from a broader perspective. Most studies analyse added value within isolated contexts, without considering its interconnected dimensions. A more integrated approach, as discussed in Section 1.1, is recommended to enhance the potential to create tangible added value in regard to wood in supply chains. For example, several of the added value aspects can be grouped based on environmental considerations. In this regard, innovations in manufacturing, such as the use of eco-friendly adhesives in wood-based panels, can enhance the environmental performance of products [64]. Similarly, integrating wood and plastic waste to create eco-friendly composites adds value to secondary raw materials, promotes cascading use, and contributes to resource efficiency [65,66]. Integrating such practices into sector polices is important not only for their positive environmental impacts but also the associated socio-economic benefits, such as increasing economic sustainability, creating new markets, and generating employment opportunities.

3.4. Outcomes of Adding Value

As shown in Figure 7, the reviewed studies mostly identify the benefits of adding value from an environmental perspective (41.4%). This is in line with the growing global awareness of sustainability and the need to adopt environmentally responsible practices. Indeed, as a raw material, wood holds inherent environmental value due to its renewability, high carbon storage capacity, and lower environmental impact compared to alternative materials. As discussed in Section 1.2, environmental value can be added at all stages of the life cycles of wood-based products, from responsible timber sourcing to efficient resource recovery. Extending a wood-based product’s ‘service life’ also prolongs carbon storage, thus contributing to the mitigation of atmospheric CO₂ concentrations [67]. In addition to sustainability, these elements often provide a competitive advantage for wood products.

In 16.3% of the studies, the outcome of adding value is not explicitly defined. This is consistent with the finding discussed in Section 3.2, where “added value” is often used as a label rather than a clearly defined concept. The third most represented category is economic impact (14.4%), highlighting the role of added value in improving market competitiveness, fostering growth, and generating new business opportunities. Implementing such approaches has now become essential for effective planning and regulatory activities that guide sector policies.

Other reported outcomes include improved product properties and performance (10.8%), new potential uses (9.9%), and the development of new products (6.3%). These aspects are often discussed in relation to the importance of diversification within the wood sector. As the market for wood-based products evolves, developing novel applications and enhancing product performance become crucial for meeting emerging demands or improving specific requirements.

Finally, the relatively little emphasis on social benefits (0.9%) suggests that these are not yet considered as central outcomes in the scientific literature on added value wood-based products [68]. However, research and innovation are key components of the Industry 5.0 approach, which promotes a sustainability- and human-centric vision extending beyond mere productivity [69]. Social impacts have cross-cutting relevance throughout wood supply chains. Examples include ensuring the rights of Indigenous populations, guaranteeing adequate working conditions and wages, promoting gender equality, and supporting employment in marginal areas. Strengthening collaboration and stakeholder engagement can serve as an effective driver of job opportunities, improve corporate image, and foster local development. Drawing insights from other research fields could improve the analysis of social dimensions. A multidisciplinary approach, incorporating social science perspectives, is therefore recommended.

Finally, it is worth noting that the limited representation of economic and social aspects may partly stem from the search string used, which did not explicitly cover broader social–economic dimensions. Nonetheless, the high occurrence of environmental aspects, which were not an explicit search term, suggests that they have a stronger association with added value than economic and social factors.

4. Conclusions

Added value is relevant at all stages of the supply chains of wood-based products. This systematic literature review considered primary research articles published in English over the last ten years in order to provide a broad overview of the related drivers and assess how the scientific literature supports the implementation of added value in wood supply chains.

With regard to research questions Q1–Q4 listed in Section 1.3, this review revealed that “added value” was often not explicitly defined or only partially addressed in the reviewed studies (Q1). More than half of the reviewed studies employed the term as a general label without further clarification, while only a minority provided a specific definition. When defined, added value was most commonly associated with economic, environmental, or product-specific aspects, reflecting its multifaceted and complex nature. As for the product categories (Q2), non-structural products, especially wood-based panels, were most frequently investigated. About a quarter of the works do not define the end application of the products, which can be linked to the frequent use of “added value” as a generic label. The predominant methods for adding value (Q3) focus on production processes and the valorisation of raw materials, including innovative manufacturing techniques, the use of lesser-known wood species, and the promotion of short timber supply chains. Sustainability emerged as a key driver in numerous studies, particularly concerning recycling, cascading use, and resource efficiency. Environmental benefits were by far the most frequently discussed outcomes (Q4), highlighting the increasing emphasis on sustainability in the wood sector. Despite this, these aspects are often not directly rewarded by the market. Mechanisms, frameworks, and measures to valorise them should therefore be encouraged, for example, by strengthening their relevance in regulations or by promoting certification schemes in the marketplace.

The overview provided by this study can contribute to a deeper understanding of the main drivers related to adding value in the wood sector. This knowledge may prove useful in various contexts, including defining research priorities, improving industry competitiveness, and facilitating stakeholder engagement.

This study highlights significant gaps in the current literature concerning the concept of “added value” in regard to wood-based products. Firstly, the frequent absence of an operational definition, with the term often used merely as a label, underscores the need for theoretical frameworks and standardised metrics. Secondly, although environmental benefits are widely acknowledged, there is a notable deficit in the analysis of social im-plications. Thirdly, the role of the workforce is either neglected or only marginally considered.

Given the dynamic nature of the wood industry, further research should integrate technological innovations—such as digitisation and Industry 4.0/5.0 approaches—with agile management practices at both micro (firm level within individual companies) and macro (policy level) scales to support a sustainable and competitive transformation of this sector. Future studies should investigate in more depth how innovation in production processes and industrial strategies can create new market opportunities, enhance the perception of wood products in the value chain, and improve consumer awareness. In this way, a cross-sectoral approach, combining research, industrial policy, and marketing practices, could provide useful tools for policy makers and entrepreneurs and lead to real benefits for wood supply chains.