Published Date December 2016, Vol.25:55–77, doi:10.1016/j.jfe.2016.08.001 Author
Christian Kimmich a,b,,
Urs Fischbacher c,d
aSwiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Zürcherstrasse 111, 8903 Birmensdorf, Switzerland
bMasaryk University, Faculty of Social Studies, Joštova 10, 61500 Brno, Czech Republic
cUniversity of Konstanz, P.O. Box 131, 78457 Konstanz, Germany
dThurgau Institute of Economics, Hauptstrasse 90, 8280 Kreuzlingen, Switzerland
Received 15 March 2016. Accepted 2 August 2016. Available online 15 September 2016. Abstract Economic theory considers physical production characteristics and related property rights as key determinants of the organization of an industry. Yet, we frequently observe coexisting governance modes within industries and firms, even when the transaction attributes of a commodity are homogenous. We test whether risk and time preferences, price expectations, and trust in supply chain types can explain variations and coexistence in governance. Specifically, we experimentally elicit economic preferences of forest managers in the Swiss wood sector. We find that all behavioral dimensions are related to the choice of sales channel. Most importantly, trust and expectations are key determinants in transferring property rights, while risk aversion, patience, and ownership structure explain the existence of plural forms at the firm level. JEL classification
Corresponding author at: Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Zürcherstrasse 111, 8903 Birmensdorf, Switzerland. Fax: +41 44 739 22 15.
For further details log on website :
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleListURL&_method=list&_ArticleListID=-1090746123&_sort=v&_st=17&view=c&_origin=related_art&panel=citeRelatedArt&_mlktType=Journal&md5=e35fdc878ee89b8a8d1a79afca67f73d&searchtype=a
Published Date October 2015, Vol.59:47–55,doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2015.05.009 Author
Ryan Bullock
Julia Lawler
Department of Environmental Studies & Sciences, Centre for Forest Interdisciplinary Research, The University of Winnipeg, 115 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E9, Canada
Received 26 November 2014. Revised 30 March 2015. Accepted 27 May 2015. Available online 2 July 2015.
Highlights
Canadian community forestry research bibliometrics were analysed for trends and gaps.
•
85 journal papers were identified spanning 1935 to 2014.
•
Peak output years and research hotspots coincide with provincial policy changes.
•
Female authorship, global profile, theme variety and collaboration are increasing.
•
Social science and not natural science dominates community forestry research in Canada.
Abstract
A bibliometric analysis of community forestry research outputs in Canada was undertaken to 1) better understand the current status as well as spatial and temporal trends in research published in peer-reviewed journals, 2) identify gaps in the research literature, and 3) provide baseline data to inform future research. For each publication, information on several core metrics was gathered, for example: (i) year of publication, (ii) number of authors, (iii) author affiliation, (iv) gender and role, (v) journal title, (vi) citation count and (vii) keywords. Temporal and spatial trends were analysed to detect periods of heightened activity and geographical focus. Using a systematic and comprehensive approach we identified 85 papers published in peer-reviewed journals between 1935 and 2014. Research output during WWII and 1990 onwards corresponds with the implementation of provincial policy and programs initiated for conservation, economic development, and to resolve social unrest. Notably, most papers analysed originated from social science research, particularly geography, and not forestry or the biophysical sciences presenting a clear disciplinary gap. Findings portray the temporal, spatial, and thematic evolution of community forestry research and policy in Canada.
For further details log on website :
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleListURL&_method=list&_ArticleListID=-1090746123&_sort=v&_st=17&view=c&_origin=related_art&panel=citeRelatedArt&_mlktType=Journal&md5=e35fdc878ee89b8a8d1a79afca67f73d&searchtype=a
Published Date December 2016, Vol.25:14–28,doi:10.1016/j.jfe.2016.07.003 Author Craig M.T. Johnston, Department of Forest and Wildlife Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1630 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706, United States Received 17 November 2015. Accepted 19 July 2016. Available online 8 August 2016. Abstract The Global Forest Products Model (GFPM) was applied to forecast the effect of increased per capita Internet adoption on the global paper products industry to 2030. Two scenarios were examined: (a) full per capita Internet adoption by 2100, and (b) more rapidly by 2050. Global newsprint consumption is estimated to be 34.2–37.1 million tonnes lower in 2030 than in the US Forest Service 2010 Resources Planning Act report, and the 2010 report from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Similarly, global printing and writing paper consumption is forecasted to be 76.7–87.1 million tonnes lower by 2030. By including controls for per capita Internet use in the demand equations for print based media, this article reflects the recent declines in global paper product consumption. Out-of-sample forecasts over a two-year period indicate global model prediction errors from 0 to 3%, depending on the product and exogenous assumptions. The results highlight the importance of considering market evolution in long-term global forecasting, and a failure to account for future rates of Internet adoption will result in an upward bias on paper product market forecasts. JEL classification
For further details log on website :
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleListURL&_method=list&_ArticleListID=-1090746123&_sort=v&_st=17&view=c&_origin=related_art&panel=citeRelatedArt&_mlktType=Journal&md5=e35fdc878ee89b8a8d1a79afca67f73d&searchtype=a
Published Date September 2015, Vol.58:29–36, doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2014.11.004 The politics of community forestry in a Global Age — A critical analysis Author Jill M. Belsky Department of Society and Conservation, College of Forestry and Conservation, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812, United States Received 30 January 2014. Revised 25 October 2014. Accepted 11 November 2014. Available online 12 December 2014. Highlights
•
Community forestry in Bhutan and Montana reveal different institutional arrangements and engagements with market forces
•
Bhutan’s national community forestry program is developing forest product markets with safeguards and regulations
•
In Montana a collaboration responds to neoliberal restructuring by purchasing and reselling divested corporate timberlands
•
Market forces in community forestry provide threats and opportunities to reconcile forest protection and local livelihood
Abstract This paper asks: (1) how has community forestry been informed by the ascendancy of particular forms of neoliberal restructuring and rise in market-based interests in environmental governance and (2) how has its engagement with these market forces affected its effectiveness in meeting the objective to reconcile livelihood and environmental protection? Towards answering these questions the paper examines two places known for their forest landscapes and livelihoods and with community forestry activities: the Himalayan country of Bhutan and the U.S. western state of Montana. Bhutan's top-down, national community forestry program and Montana's bottoms-up, collaborative effort known as the Montana Legacy Program are shown to be highly different not only in their institutional arrangement but also in their engagements with particular forms of neoliberalism including type of markets, regulatory processes, market opportunities, and the role of the private sector. Their differences reveal important ways that market forces and market-oriented interests shape threats as well as solutions to meeting forest protection and livelihood objectives in the two contexts, but produce unpredictable partnerships and awkward contradictions in the process. Keywords
This article belongs to the Special Issue: Community forestry.
For further details log on website :
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleListURL&_method=list&_ArticleListID=-1090746123&_sort=v&_st=17&view=c&_origin=related_art&panel=citeRelatedArt&_mlktType=Journal&md5=e35fdc878ee89b8a8d1a79afca67f73d&searchtype=a
Published Date December 2016, Vol.25:1–13,doi:10.1016/j.jfe.2016.07.001 Author
Dora E. Carías Vega,
Rodney J. Keenan
School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, The University of Melbourne, 221 Bouverie Street, Carlton, VIC 3053, Australia
Received 29 January 2016. Accepted 12 July 2016. Available online 3 August 2016.
Abstract
Community forestry enterprises (CFEs) have gained considerable traction with rural development and forestry practitioners as models for community development, poverty alleviation, and conservation. This paper uses New Institutional Economic theory to identify the key organizational features and potential inherent weaknesses of CFEs. NIE theory focuses on arguments of economic efficiency, specifically transaction cost reductions that serve as incentives for collective action by groups of owners. Examples are given to show how the organization of CFEs reduced transaction costs stemming from interactions with industrial loggers and service providers. However, the creation of these community enterprises goes beyond simple transaction cost reductions and economic justifications. Additional unquantifiable benefits, such as self-determination, control over resources that communities have historically used, application of acquired skills, political representation, and application of acquired skills to name a few, are also secured through community ownership. These benefits however do not come without a cost. As enterprises where ownership rights are incomplete or ill-defined and which do not operate with the incentives of investor-owned firms, CFEs have little to no initial capital pool and experience considerable investment limitations due to limited wealth, horizon problems, and unsolved issues with moral hazard vis-à-vis banks. CFEs also face important management and collective decision-making challenges. In spite of their institutional weaknesses, it is apparent that many societies have decided that the benefits of community ownership far outweigh their ownership costs. State intervention and policy have played an important role in building the necessary supportive framework for the development of these enterprises. NIE as a dominant model for understanding alternative entrepreneurial forms was useful for identifying some important aspects of CFEs that, in a profit-driven economy, can constitute weaknesses that place them at a disadvantage with investor-owned firms. This analysis informs where policy should be targeted if CFEs are to be supported and fostered.
For further details log on website :
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleListURL&_method=list&_ArticleListID=-1090746123&_sort=v&_st=17&view=c&_origin=related_art&panel=citeRelatedArt&_mlktType=Journal&md5=e35fdc878ee89b8a8d1a79afca67f73d&searchtype=a
