Winners | Losers |
"Facts" | Values/perspectives |
Plantations | Natural forests |
Primary products | Processed |
Marketed | Non-marketed |
Wood | Non-wood • Services • Alternatives |
Producer | Consumer |
Local | "External" "Footprint" |
Domestic | Export markets (Other) |
Forest area | Forest value |
Sectoral | Extra-sectoral |
Large-scale enterprise | Small |
• Incentives for plantation development provided by consumption has negative social and environmental consequences
• "Internal" temperate trade growing - has negative consequences too (e.g. reduction in management when cheaper to import from elsewhere)
• Very little consumer pressure to improve management in some major importers (whilst own exports may require improved management) (e.g. China 10 million m3 imports and one own forest certified)
• "Country of origin" of product may not be origin of timber (in trade terms) = C.O.C. problem
• Energy policy - oil company power to override governments and other sectors
• Few public policy levers available
Demand-side/consumption problems
• Trade/import policies inconsistent with development cooperation policies, e.g. low level of linkage with producer government capabilities to capture resource rents
• Tropical timber a relatively low proportion of imports (when it is zero proportion - problem too - no leverage)
• Any action which can take likely to have some perverse consequences (e.g. displacing illegality)
• Illegal/corrupt transport and import chain
• Few mechanisms for deciding what/how much to consume
• Economic policy tends to override all sectoral policies
• Challenge to gain control over domestic market first (management for export market generally "better")
• NFP is promising
• Little plantation investment where natural forest (still) available
• High consumer country tariffs (20-30% on processed timber?) plus rules on domestic controls limits ability to promote local processing
• Security forces, customs, ports and harbours not working in concert with forestry governance
• Low formal constitutional benefits to local society leads to incentive for informal/illegal forestry
• Consumer "countries" have responsibility to invest in producer country capacity and to sort out import barriers
• Ability to control tied to ownership
• "Capacity-building" can be mis-targeted and is meaningless without stimulating incentives for improvement - "carrots and sticks"
• In "out of control" situations log export bans seen as one of few governance options. Others:
• Increase engagement/stakeholder participation-negotiation
• Improved log-lumber tracking systems
• Too many dogmatic/crass macro-economic prescriptions
• Massive revenue losses from illegality = domestic market less controlled than export market (Latin America and Central Africa)
• Small group of producers/buyers have most power (Brazil, Mexico, Central Africa)
• Changes in policies/subsidies in other countries + trade liberalisation = rise of land use alternatives (e.g. soybeans)
• Will out-compete forestry
• Roads - catalytic of markets
• Impact of trade critically dependent on non-trade governance decisions
• Link to other policies, e.g. beef tariffs + soybeans as inputs to beef production chain
• Soybeans in Brazil might help forest management in China!
• Small number of big companies in control of cash crops
Context: Tropical timber production - from "forest rich" areas |
• Domestic market may be big
• Different types of producers
• Small-scale - follow the frontier - "termites". Legal and illegal
• Big. More static producers
• Should be able to control because all goes through key gateways (e.g. Belem)
• Trade focused on small number of species - but key factors can enable use of a wide range of others (Latin America + Central Africa)
• Protest/advocacy groups
• Significant effect on export companies leaving free-reign of domestic enterprises
• Consumer pressure and government policy has stimulated certification
• Secured market share (Bolivia)
• Removal of subsidies to parastatals has stimulated community forestry = socially vital
• Regional trade agreement helps this (e.g. NAFTA)
• Trade agreements may increase gap between well-managed export sector and poorly-managed domestic sector
• Knock-on effects: erosion of local governance or stimulus to better pratice?
• Cheaper/more available (subsidised) plantation timber out-competes natural forest (community) management (e.g. US + Chile plantations)