Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
Type: Journal article
Title: A Critical Comparison of Conventional, Certified, and Community Management of Tropical Forests for Timber in Terms of Environmental, Economic, and Social Variables
Author: Burivalova, Z.
Hua, F.
Koh, L.
Garcia, C.
Putz, F.
Citation: Conservation Letters, 2017; 10(1):4-14
Publisher: Wiley
Issue Date: 2017
ISSN: 1755-263X
Statement of
Zuzana Burivalova, Fangyuan Hua, Lian Pin Koh, Claude Garcia and Francis Putz
Abstract: Tropical forests are crucial in terms of biodiversity and ecosystem services, but at the same time, they are major sources of revenue and provide livelihoods for forest-dependent people. Hopes for the simultaneous achievement of conservation goals and poverty alleviation are therefore increasingly placed on forests used for timber extraction. Most timber exploitation is carried out unsustainably, which causes forest degradation. Two important mechanisms have emerged to promote sustainable forest management: certification and community-based forest management (CFM). We synthesize the published information about how forest certification and CFM perform in terms of environmental, social, and economic variables. With the caveat that very few published studies meet the standards for formal impact evaluation, we found that certification has substantial environmental benefits, typically achieved at a cost of reduced short-term financial profit, and accompanied by some improvement to the welfare of neighboring communities. We found that the economic and environmental benefits of CFM are understudied, but that the social impacts are controversial, with both positive and negative changes reported. We identify the trade-offs that likely caused these conflicting results and that, if addressed, would help both CFM and certification deliver the hoped-for benefits.
Keywords: Biodiversity; certification; community-based forest management; forest degradation; Forest Stewardship Council; price premium; reduced-impact logging; social capital; trade-offs; welfare
Rights: Copyright and Photocopying: © 2016 The Authors. Conservation Letters published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
RMID: 0030046953
DOI: 10.1111/conl.12244
Appears in Collections:Ecology, Evolution and Landscape Science publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
hdl_105965.pdfPublished Version597.53 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.