IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/umnees/0794.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Damned if you do, Damned if you don't – Reduced Climate Impact vs. Sustainable Forests in Sweden

Author

Listed:
  • Geijer, Erik

    (Dept of Forest Economics)

  • Bostedt, Göran

    (Dept of Forest Economics)

  • Brännlund, Runar

    (Department of Economics, Umeå University)

Abstract

The main objective of this paper is to analyze the potential goal conflict between two of Sweden’s environmental objectives: Sustainable Forests and Reduced Climate Impact – or, more precisely, the conflict between forest conservation and the supply of wood fuel. To accomplish this, we use a forest sector model that includes the suppliers and major users of roundwood. The econometric results, based on a data set that spans 40 years, show that all the own price elasticities have the expected signs. Among the three forestry products, the supply and (long-term) demand of forest fuel seems to be most sensitive to a price change. In a second step, the estimated model is used to simulate the effect of increased forest conservation -- the Sustainable Forest objective -- on the supply of wood fuel. If oil is used as a substitute, Swedish emissions of greenhouse gases will increase by almost 0.92 percent, which indicates a clear conflict with the Reduced Climate Impact objective.

Suggested Citation

  • Geijer, Erik & Bostedt, Göran & Brännlund, Runar, 2009. "Damned if you do, Damned if you don't – Reduced Climate Impact vs. Sustainable Forests in Sweden," Umeå Economic Studies 794, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:umnees:0794
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.umu.se/DownloadAsset.action?contentId=96744&languageId=3&assetKey=ues794
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Munnich Vass, Miriam & Elofsson, Katarina, 2013. "Is forest sequestration at the expense of bioenergy and forest products cost-effective in EU climate policy to 2050?," Working Paper Series 2013:9, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Goal conflict; Wood fuels; Forest sector model; Roundwood markets; Forest conservation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C30 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - General
    • L73 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Primary Products and Construction - - - Forest Products
    • Q41 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Demand and Supply; Prices
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hhs:umnees:0794. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: David Skog (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inumuse.html .

    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.