Are Ecosystem Services Complementary or Competitive? An Econometric Analysis of Cost Functions of Private Forests in Vietnam

Are Ecosystem Services Complementary or Competitive? An Econometric Analysis of Cost Functions of... Forest ecosystem service (FES) provisioning and management in Vietnam is a priority in the Vietnamese environmental agenda. The main rationale of private forest management is to maximise profits from timber and non-timber forest product (NTFP) production. From a social point of view an under-supply of positive forest externalities (or non-marketed ecosystem services) exists. This paper therefore contributes to the ecosystem service (ES) literature by assessing the production cost structure, in other words, the cost of marketed production and provision of carbon and biodiversity, based on a survey of private forest owners in Hoa Binh Province in Vietnam. The econometric analysis was carried out using a dual cost function approach to analyse the trade-off between forestry costs and ecological performance. This is, to our knowledge, the first time such an approach has been used to estimate the production relationship between marketed outputs and non-marketed ES in the forest sector. This approach appears to be appropriate for handling the multiple joint outputs of forest production and allows us to estimate marginal costs and other cost measures such as cost complementarities in the production of multiple ES. Our results indicate that there is complementarity in the provision of timber and carbon sequestration and, consequently, policies that enhance carbon sequestration in private forests in Vietnam can be implemented without additional costs for the forest owner. We also found that keeping deadwood (to favour biodiversity) had no significant cost and was complementary with NTFP (also an indicator of biodiversity in our study), but could increase the marginal cost of producing timber. This means that biodiversity can be enhanced at no additional cost, provided that the quantity of deadwood does not significantly increase. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Ecological Economics Elsevier

Are Ecosystem Services Complementary or Competitive? An Econometric Analysis of Cost Functions of Private Forests in Vietnam

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/are-ecosystem-services-complementary-or-competitive-an-econometric-lSlwStxht0
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V.
ISSN
0921-8009
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.01.029
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Forest ecosystem service (FES) provisioning and management in Vietnam is a priority in the Vietnamese environmental agenda. The main rationale of private forest management is to maximise profits from timber and non-timber forest product (NTFP) production. From a social point of view an under-supply of positive forest externalities (or non-marketed ecosystem services) exists. This paper therefore contributes to the ecosystem service (ES) literature by assessing the production cost structure, in other words, the cost of marketed production and provision of carbon and biodiversity, based on a survey of private forest owners in Hoa Binh Province in Vietnam. The econometric analysis was carried out using a dual cost function approach to analyse the trade-off between forestry costs and ecological performance. This is, to our knowledge, the first time such an approach has been used to estimate the production relationship between marketed outputs and non-marketed ES in the forest sector. This approach appears to be appropriate for handling the multiple joint outputs of forest production and allows us to estimate marginal costs and other cost measures such as cost complementarities in the production of multiple ES. Our results indicate that there is complementarity in the provision of timber and carbon sequestration and, consequently, policies that enhance carbon sequestration in private forests in Vietnam can be implemented without additional costs for the forest owner. We also found that keeping deadwood (to favour biodiversity) had no significant cost and was complementary with NTFP (also an indicator of biodiversity in our study), but could increase the marginal cost of producing timber. This means that biodiversity can be enhanced at no additional cost, provided that the quantity of deadwood does not significantly increase.

Journal

Ecological EconomicsElsevier

Published: May 1, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off