IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i11p4749-d369708.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Income Differentiation as a Factor of Unsustainability in Forestry

Author

Listed:
  • Mansoor Maitah

    (Department of Economics, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences of the Czech University of Life Sciences in Prague, 16500 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Daniel Toth

    (Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences in Prague, 16500 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Luboš Smutka

    (Department of Trade and Finance, Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences in Prague, 16500 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Kamil Maitah

    (Department of Trade and Finance, Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences in Prague, 16500 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Veronika Jarolínová

    (Department of Law, Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences in Prague, 16500 Prague, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Environmental policy is a set of objectives put in place for the protection of natural resources including water, air, soil, food, and other renewable resources. In addition, it has a considerable impact on the labor market and the income of employees in the environmental and forestry sectors. Environmental policy both directly and indirectly creates new jobs, the so-called green jobs. These jobs are designed to be long-term and sustainable, working towards both environmental and socio-economic stability. The aim of the research was to determine if there was a difference in income between the forestry and the environmental policy sectors. The primary objective of this paper was to propose ideas and instruments for strengthening the income of employees in both sectors to the creators of the new State Environmental Policy. This objective was met through appropriate research methods, including the field survey technique. In terms of statistics, we used descriptive characteristics and tested the hypothesis using a T-test. The data from 70 respondents were collected from January 2019 to December 2019. Half of the respondents were from the forestry sector, and the other half worked in environmental protection. Their total income was compared by using two selective T-tests, and the results showed a strong discrepancy. The analysis indicated that the average incomes in forestry are significantly lower than incomes in the environmental protection sector (in the Czech Republic). The statistically higher income of environmental workers reflects that the State Environmental Policy is effective, which improves the position of employees in the labor market. The forestry sector deserves similar concentrated state assistance, and therefore we recommend that the new State Environmental Policy in the Czech Republic also addresses the problem of low income in forestry.

Suggested Citation

  • Mansoor Maitah & Daniel Toth & Luboš Smutka & Kamil Maitah & Veronika Jarolínová, 2020. "Income Differentiation as a Factor of Unsustainability in Forestry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-14, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:11:p:4749-:d:369708
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/11/4749/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/11/4749/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maczulskij, Terhi, 2013. "Employment sector and pay gaps: Genetic and environmental influences," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 89-96.
    2. Han Zhang & Jari Kuuluvainen & Youliang Ning & Wenmei Liao & Can Liu, 2017. "Institutional Regime, Off-Farm Employment, and the Interaction Effect: What are the Determinants of Households’ Forestland Transfer in China?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, October.
    3. Peter Berck & Sandra Hoffmann, 2002. "Assessing the Employment Impacts of Environmental and Natural Resource Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 133-156, June.
    4. Seok-Joon Hwang & KwangUk Kim, 2017. "An understanding on the relationship between the employment and the environmental policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(4), pages 361-373, October.
    5. K M Atikur Rahman & Dunfu Zhang, 2018. "Analyzing the Level of Accessibility of Public Urban Green Spaces to Different Socially Vulnerable Groups of People," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-27, October.
    6. Daniel Toth & Mansoor Maitah & Kamil Maitah, 2019. "Development and Forecast of Employment in Forestry in the Czech Republic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-13, December.
    7. Chung Choe & Philippe Van Kerm, 2018. "Foreign Workers and the Wage Distribution: What Does the Influence Function Reveal?," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-26, September.
    8. Horbach Jens, 2010. "The Impact of Innovation Activities on Employment in the Environmental Sector – Empirical Results for Germany at the Firm Level," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 230(4), pages 403-419, August.
    9. Mathew Forstater, 2003. "Public employment and environmental sustainability," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 385-406.
    10. Ángela Triguero & María C. Cuerva & Carlos Álvarez-Aledo, 2017. "Environmental Innovation and Employment: Drivers and Synergies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-22, November.
    11. Therese Bennich & Salim Belyazid & Birgit Kopainsky & Arnaud Diemer, 2018. "The Bio-Based Economy: Dynamics Governing Transition Pathways in the Swedish Forestry Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Piotr Prus & Paweł Dziekański & Małgorzata Bogusz & Małgorzata Szczepanek, 2021. "Spatial Differentiation of Agricultural Potential and the Level of Development of Voivodeships in Poland in 2008–2018," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-27, March.
    2. Paweł Dziekański & Piotr Prus, 2020. "Financial Diversity and the Development Process: Case study of Rural Communes of Eastern Poland in 2009–2018," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-25, August.
    3. Paweł Dziekański & Piotr Prus & Piotr Sołtyk & Magdalena Wrońska & Florin Imbrea & Laura Smuleac & Raul Pascalau & Karolina Błaszczyk, 2022. "Spatial Disproportions of the Green Economy and the Financial Situation of Polish Voivodeships in 2010–2020," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-27, October.
    4. Ewa Chomać-Pierzecka & Hubert Gąsiński & Joanna Rogozińska-Mitrut & Dariusz Soboń & Sebastian Zupok, 2023. "Review of Selected Aspects of Wind Energy Market Development in Poland and Lithuania in the Face of Current Challenges," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-17, January.
    5. Lucie Severová & Karel Šrédl & Marie Prášilová & Roman Svoboda & Alexandr Soukup & Marek Dvořák & Jitka Prachařová, 2021. "Change in the Structure of the Accommodation Capacity of the Czech Hotel Industry under Conditions of Economic Globalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-24, August.
    6. Renata Aguayo Lopes da Silva & Renato Cesar Gonçalves Robert & Thomas Purfürst, 2023. "How Is the Forest Sector’s Contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Being Addressed? A Systematic Review of the Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-25, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fernández, Sara & Torrecillas, Celia & Díaz, Guillermo Arenas, 2024. "Does eco-innovation stimulate employment? The case of Spanish manufacturing firms," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 571-585.
    2. Jafar Rana Adeel & Shabbir Aiza & Kousar Farzana, 2019. "Impact of Green Practices on Buying Habits in Pakistan’s Food Sector," Economics, Sciendo, vol. 7(2), pages 19-30, December.
    3. Hagos, Fitsum & Makombe, Godswill & Namara, Regassa & Awulachew, Seleshi Bekele, 2008. "Importance of irrigated agriculture to the Ethiopian economy: capturing the direct net benefits of irrigation," IWMI Conference Proceedings 246409, International Water Management Institute.
    4. Jian Wei & Hui Xiao & Hao Liu & Xiaotao Huang & Dahong Zhang, 2022. "Does the Collective Forestland Tenure Reform Promote Rural Households’ Forestry Inputs? Based on Dual Perspectives of Rural Households’ Divergence and Inter-Generational Differences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-23, October.
    5. Kaplan, Jonathan D. & Johansson, Robert C., 2003. "When The !%$? Hits The Land: Implications For Us Agriculture And Environment When Land Application Of Manure Is Constrained," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22002, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. John B. Loomis, 2013. "Incorporating distributional issues into benefit–cost analysis: why, how, and two empirical examples using non-market valuation," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 9, pages 294-316, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Tommy Lundgren, 2009. "Environmental Protection and Impact on Adjacent Economies: Evidence from the Swedish Mountain Region," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(3), pages 513-532, September.
    8. Böckerman, Petri & Maczulskij, Terhi, 2016. "The Education-health Nexus: Fact and fiction," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 112-116.
    9. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/2vteelu0n785l82j764n6ul273 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. María E. Aguilar-Fernández & José Ramon Otegi-Olaso, 2018. "Firm Size and the Business Model for Sustainable Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-27, December.
    11. Böckerman, Petri & Vainiomäki, Jari, 2013. "Stature and life-time labor market outcomes: Accounting for unobserved differences," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 86-96.
    12. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco & Paglialunga, Elena, 2018. "The employment impact of private and public actions for energy efficiency: Evidence from European industries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 250-267.
    13. Grazia Cecere & Massimiliano Mazzanti, 2015. "Green jobs, innovation and environmentally oriented strategies in European SMEs," SEEDS Working Papers 2115, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Dec 2015.
    14. Yushchenko, Alisa & Patel, Martin Kumar, 2017. "Cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency programs: How to better understand and improve from multiple stakeholder perspectives?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 538-550.
    15. Schneck, Stefan, 2018. "The effect of self-employment on income inequality," Working Papers 05/18, Institut für Mittelstandsforschung (IfM) Bonn.
    16. Consoli, Davide & Marin, Giovanni & Marzucchi, Alberto & Vona, Francesco, 2016. "Do green jobs differ from non-green jobs in terms of skills and human capital?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 1046-1060.
    17. Zehua Wang & Fachao Liang & Sheng-Hau Lin, 2023. "Can socially sustainable development be achieved through homestead withdrawal? A hybrid multiple-attributes decision analysis," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, December.
    18. Robert J R Elliott & Joanne K Lindley, 2014. "Green Jobs and Growth in the United States: Green Shoots or False Dawn?," Discussion Papers 14-09, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    19. Dan Costin Nițescu & Valentin Murgu, 2020. "The Bioeconomy and Foreign Trade in Food Products—A Sustainable Partnership at the European Level?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-20, March.
    20. João Leitão & Sónia de Brito & Serena Cubico, 2019. "Eco-Innovation Influencers: Unveiling the Role of Lean Management Principles Adoption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-27, April.
    21. Tomas Macak & Jan Hron & Jaromir Stusek, 2020. "A Causal Model of the Sustainable Use of Resources: A Case Study on a Woodworking Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-22, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:11:p:4749-:d:369708. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.