This paper designs an Economy-Welfare-Environment Adjustment System model (EWEAS model or EWE model in short) which consists of the circular flow of the economic, the welfare, and the environment system of forestry. That is, this model builds the relationship between the systems for material wealth and that for mental wealth.

The EWE model is designed as a complete open system model which describes the economy-welfare-environment circular system in forestry by linking up the internal system of forestry with the surrounding external systems. The EWE model can be manipulated as a policy formation or a policy decision model, and it is available for policy evaluation in the economic, the welfare and the environmental phase of forestry. The model is a basic simulation system model which is reliable in its reproductive fitness, stability and universality. Thus, this model ought to be useful in any country in the world as well as in Japan.

Kishine, E-mail: tk@mm.unknown

article id 5291, category Article

David J. Brooks. (1986). Evaluating the regional and distributional impacts of forestry cost-share payments. Silva Fennica vol. 20 no. 4 article id 5291. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.a27747

Keywords: forest policy; timber supply; timber market; United States; welfare economics; market simulation; cost-share payments

Abstract | View details | Full text in PDF | Author Info

Standard methods of welfare economics are used in a market simulating framework to evaluate policy measures designed to increase future timber supplies. Forest management cost-share programs are examined using this methodology. The differential regional impact of cost-share payments is considered, as is the distribution of these benefits between stumpage producers (owners of forest land) and stumpage consumers (producers of forest products). Previous estimates of the welfare gains that would result from a higher level of forest management cost-share payments in the southern United States are revised to account for the loss of public revenue resulting from lower future prices. A methodology for comparing alternative policy instruments is discussed, and a preliminary, qualitative comparison is made between the use of cost-share payments and alternative policy measures.

Brooks, E-mail: db@mm.unknown

Category : Review article

article id 632, category Review article

William F. Hyde, Gunnar Köhlin. (2000). Social forestry reconsidered. Silva Fennica vol. 34 no. 3 article id 632. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.632

Keywords: deforestation; community forestry; developing countries; forest resources; rural development; welfare

Abstract | View details | Full text in PDF | Author Info

This paper reviews the expectations for forestry’s contribution to rural development – and for its special contributions to the most disadvantaged, to women and the landless users of the forest commons. A growing literature challenges some of these expectations; in particular, certain expectations about cultural differences and physical stocks as explanatory factors for patterns of household behavior. This literature could also be used to support a call for sharper definitions of deforestation, improved indicators of the effects of forest resources on the rural poor, and improved design of forest policy interventions. Our paper reviews the literature, suggests some unifying themes, and identifies the critical issues that remain unanswered. The primary contention arising from this literature is that households follow systematic patterns of economic behavior in their consumption and production of forest resources, and that policy interventions in social forestry should be analyzed with regard to markets, policies, and institutions. Markets for forest resources generally exist in some form – although they may be thin. Successful forestry projects and policies require careful identification of the target populations and careful estimation of market and market-related effects on the household behavior of these populations. Institutional structures that assure secure rights for scarce forest resources are uniquely important in a forest enviornment often characterized by open access resources and weak government administration. Social and community forestry, improved stoves, improved strains of multi-purpose trees, and even private commercial forest operations can all improve local welfare, but only where scarcity is correctly identified and the appropriate institutions are in place. An increasing number of observations of afforestation from developing countries around the world is evidence that forestry activities do satisfy these conditions in selective important cases. The critical point for policy is to identify the characteristics of these successful cases that are predictive of other cases where new forestry activities can be welfare enhancing.

Hyde, Centre for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia E-mail: wfhyde@aol.com
Köhlin, Göteborg University, Göteborg, Sweden E-mail: gk@nn.se

Click this link to register to Silva Fennica.

If you are a registered user, log in to save your selected articles for later access.

Contents alert

Your selected articles

Follow @SilvaFennica