{"id":2064,"date":"2022-10-28T11:55:07","date_gmt":"2022-10-28T01:55:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/primaryforestsandclimate.org\/?post_type=publications&p=2064"},"modified":"2022-11-16T11:11:44","modified_gmt":"2022-11-16T01:11:44","slug":"the-economic-value-of-the-worlds-forests","status":"publish","type":"publications","link":"https:\/\/primaryforestsandclimate.org\/publications\/the-economic-value-of-the-worlds-forests\/","title":{"rendered":"Policy brief: The economic value of the world’s forests"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n\t
These benefits derive from what are called \u2018ecosystem services\u2019, which include three broad categories: provisioning services \u2013 such as wood, food, and fibre; regulating services \u2013 such as carbon storage, water filtration, and coastal protection; and cultural services \u2013 such as recreation, aesthetics, and spiritual wellbeing.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
We reviewed historic economic valuation studies to ascertain how and where different forest ecosystem services have been valued and to identify the drivers of value estimates and knowledge gaps.\u00a0<\/span>Our review \u00a0findings demonstrate the relevance of economic\u00a0valuation of ecosystem services for socially\u00a0optimal policy making.<\/p>\n
We found that the\u00a0literature on economic valuation of forest\u00a0ecosystem services has been limited in terms\u00a0of its coverage of some of the world\u2019s most\u00a0important forest regions and ecological zones.<\/p>\n
Our study also revealed that the literature is dominated by market-pricing techniques, rather than non-market techniques, reflecting the\u00a0historically greater focus on estimating a\u00a0narrow set of extractive uses, particularly\u00a0managed forestry for timber. This has left\u00a0important weaknesses in our understanding\u00a0of bundles (or aggregations) of ecosystems\u00a0services provided by the world\u2019s forests,\u00a0where in many instances the extractive uses\u00a0involved trading-off the benefits from other\u00a0provisioning, regulatory, and cultural ecosystem\u00a0services.<\/p>\n
Information of the value of all forest\u00a0ecosystem services is needed when assessing\u00a0the costs and benefits of a proposed change\u00a0in forest use. Our meta-analysis underlines\u00a0the importance of considering the economic\u00a0value of multiples of ecosystem services\u00a0when formulating public policy that supports\u00a0forest conservation over the management\u00a0of forest for single-use, extractive industrial\u00a0production, or clearing for mineral extraction\u00a0and agriculture.<\/p>\n
Understanding the drivers of the\u00a0value estimates of forest ecosystem services\u00a0helps identify better policy interventions\u00a0for global forest conservation efforts.\u00a0In this regard, our findings support local,\u00a0regional, and global efforts to address the\u00a0problem of deforestation and degradation\u00a0in ways that support Indigenous access and\u00a0use rights of forests, reduce biodiversity\u00a0loss, and minimize atmospheric greenhouse\u00a0gas concentrations.<\/p>\n