Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Home
  • Home
Hostname: page-component-559fc8cf4f-qpj69 Total loading time: 0.297 Render date: 2021-03-07T21:49:46.432Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }
EnglishFrançais
Environment and Development Economics Environment and Development Economics

Article contents

The economic and environmental effects of an EU ban on illegal logging imports. Insights from a CGE assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 January 2013

Francesco Bosello ,
Ramiro Parrado  and
Renato Rosa
Francesco Bosello
Affiliation:
Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, University of Milan and Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change, Italy. E-mail: francesco.bosello@feem.it
Ramiro Parrado
Affiliation:
Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Isola di S. Giorgio Maggiore, 30124 Venice, Italy; Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change and Ca'Foscari University, Italy. E-mail: ramiro.parrado@feem.it
Renato Rosa
Affiliation:
Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Italy and Nova School of Business and Economics, Portugal. E-mail: renato.rosa@novasbe.pt
Corresponding
E-mail address:
francesco.bosello@feem.it
ramiro.parrado@feem.it
renato.rosa@novasbe.pt
Get access
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The European Union (EU) is now discussing a legislation proposal to ban illegal timber from the EU market. We use the ICES model to estimate the reallocation of global demand and timber imports following the EU legislation. We aim to assess the economic impacts and measure the potential emission reduction resulting from the introduction of this policy. Results show that an EU ban targeting only log imports is not effective in reducing illegal logging, but its main effect is the removal of illegal logs from international markets. Additionally, the unilateral EU ban increases secondary wood production in illegal logging countries as their exports become relatively more competitive. Through this mechanism, part of the banned illegal timber will re-enter international trade flows ‘hidden’ as processed wood. Extending the ban to timber processed products eliminates this effect and reinforces direct carbon emissions reduction from logging activities.

Type
Research Article
Information
Environment and Development Economics , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , April 2013 , pp. 184 - 206
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.
If you should have access and can't see this content please contact technical support.

References

Banerjee, O. and Alavalapati, J.R. (2009), ‘Modeling forest sector illegality in a dynamic computable general equilibrium framework: the case of forest concessions in Brazil’, Paper presented at the Twelfth Annual Conference on Global Economic Analysis, 10–12 June 2009, Santiago, Chile.Google Scholar
Bhagwati, J.N. (1965), ‘On the equivalence of tariffs and quotas, in trade, growth and the balance of payments’, in Baldwin, R.E. et al. (eds), Trade, Growth and the Balance of Payments: Essays in Honor of Gottfried Haberler, Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, pp. 53–67.Google Scholar
Brack, D. and Hayman, G. (2001), ‘Options for intergovernmental action to help combat illegal logging and illegal trade in timber and forest products’, London: Royal Institute of International Affairs.Google Scholar
Brack, D., Gray, K., and Hayman, G. (2002), ‘Controlling the international trade in illegally logged timber and wood products’, London: Royal Institute of International Affairs.Google Scholar
Brown, C. (2000), ‘The global outlook for future wood supply from forest plantations’, FAO Working Paper No. GFPOS/WP/03, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Burniaux, J.M. and Truong, T.P. (2002), ‘GTAP-E: an energy-environmental version of the GTAP Model’, GTAP Technical Paper No.16, West Lafayette, IN.Google Scholar
CIE (2010), ‘A final report to inform a Regulation Impact Statement for the proposed new policy on illegally logged timber’, Final Report, Centre for International Economics, Canberra & Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
Contreras-Hermosilla, A., Doornbosch, R., and Lodge, M. (2007), ‘The economics of illegal logging and associated trade’, OECD Background Paper for the Round Table on Sustainable Development discussion on illegal logging, 8–9 January, SG/SD/RT(2007)1, Paris.Google Scholar
FAOSTAT (2010), Forestry database, [Available at] http://faostat.fao.org/site/626/default.aspx#ancor.Google Scholar
Geist, H.J. and Lambin, E.F. (2001), ‘What drives tropical deforestation? A meta-analysis of proximate and underlying causes of deforestation based on subnational case study evidence’, LUCC International Project Office, LUCC Report Series No. 4, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.Google Scholar
Indufor (2008), ‘Assessment of the impact of potential further measures to prevent the importation or placing on the market of illegally harvested timber or products derived from such timber’, Indufor – Final Report, Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
IPCC (2007), ‘Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’, (Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A., eds), IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 pp.Google Scholar
Laird, S. (1997), ‘Quantifying commercial policies’, in Francois, J.F. and Reinert, K. (eds), Applied Trade Policy Modelling: A Handbook, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Chapter 2.Google Scholar
Li, R., Buongiorno, J., Tuner, A.J., Zhu, S., and Prestemon, J. (2008), ‘Long-term effects of eliminating logging on the world forest industries, trade, and inventory’, Forest Policy and Economics 10: 480–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mi, R., McInnis, T., and Heyhoe, E. (2010), ‘The economic consequences of restricting the import of illegally logged timber’, ABARE Report to the Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar
Narayanan, B.G. and Walmsley, T.L. (2008), Global Trade, Assistance, and Production: The GTAP 7 Data Base, West Lafayette, IN: Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University.Google Scholar
Palmer, C. (2001), ‘The extent and causes of illegal logging: an analysis of a major cause of tropical deforestation in Indonesia’, Working Paper, The Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment (CSERGE), Department of Economics, University College London, London.Google Scholar
Seneca Creek Associates (2004), ‘Illegal logging and global wood markets: the competitive impacts on the US wood products industry’, prepared for American Forest and Paper Association by Seneca Creek Associates and Wood Resources International, USA.Google Scholar
Turner, J.A., Katz, A., and Buongiorno, J. (2007), ‘Implications for the New Zealand wood products sector of trade distortions due to illegal logging’, Report to the New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry prepared by Scion, Rotorua, New Zealand.Google Scholar
UN FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization) (2006), ‘Global forest resources assessment 2005: progress towards sustainable forest management’, FAO Forestry Paper No. 147, United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
World Bank (2006), ‘Strengthening forest law enforcement and governance, addressing a systemic constraint to sustainable development’, Report No. 36638, GLB, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar

Bosello Supplementary Material

Appendix

PDF 135 KB

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 15
Total number of PDF views: 97 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 7th March 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

7 Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The economic and environmental effects of an EU ban on illegal logging imports. Insights from a CGE assessment
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

The economic and environmental effects of an EU ban on illegal logging imports. Insights from a CGE assessment
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

The economic and environmental effects of an EU ban on illegal logging imports. Insights from a CGE assessment
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *