Confusing liquidation with income in BC's forests: Economic analysis and the BC forest industry

Forest exploitation in British Columbia is currently unsustainable. Economic analysis is frequently used to justify the high rate of cut by documenting the revenue, job and wage benefits of current industrial forestry. However, Hicks’ definition of income implies that it is poor accounting practice...

Full description

Autores:
Tipo de recurso:
Fecha de publicación:
2000
Institución:
Universidad del Rosario
Repositorio:
Repositorio EdocUR - U. Rosario
Idioma:
eng
OAI Identifier:
oai:repository.urosario.edu.co:10336/27411
Acceso en línea:
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00134-8
https://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/27411
Palabra clave:
Income
Natural capital
Accounting
Extraction ceiling
Ecoforestry
Rights
License
Restringido (Acceso a grupos específicos)
id EDOCUR2_2bd0b4d3f3c6806f91ad6e1665a042b4
oai_identifier_str oai:repository.urosario.edu.co:10336/27411
network_acronym_str EDOCUR2
network_name_str Repositorio EdocUR - U. Rosario
repository_id_str
spelling a482d4a2-38a1-4675-af20-5c54c7576bab-12020-08-19T14:42:05Z2020-08-19T14:42:05Z2000-07Forest exploitation in British Columbia is currently unsustainable. Economic analysis is frequently used to justify the high rate of cut by documenting the revenue, job and wage benefits of current industrial forestry. However, Hicks’ definition of income implies that it is poor accounting practice to count the consumption of natural capital as income. Yet in BC, economic analysis fails to make adjustments for the consumption of forest capital. Such analysis provides society with misleading signals of future economic prospects. By reference to landscape ecology, conservation biology, forest ecology, and ecosystem-based management, this paper sets out requirements for a forest management regime that maintains forest capital intact and for determining a rate of cut that would likely maintain ecosystem structure and function. This ecologically sustainable rate of cut can be seen as an ‘extraction ceiling’. Extraction beyond this ceiling is considered to involve natural capital consumption. This extraction ceiling is used to divide the proceeds from timber extraction into ‘interest’ and ‘depletion’ streams. The interest stream is consistent with maintaining capital intact, and can be considered true income. The depletion stream involves capital consumption. Basing economic analysis of the forest industry on an extraction ceiling encourages debate about defining sustainable extraction levels and about how to make the transition to sustainable forestry. It also shows that the timber industry overstates its contribution to government revenues and to the province’s economic well-being. Critics of industrial forestry in BC have yet to take full advantage of how proper accounting for natural capital depletion can show the advantages to moving towards an ecoforestry approach. By insisting that economists make adjustments where natural capital depletion is projected to occur, advocates of ecoforestry can ensure a more level playing field for the comparison of industrial forestry and ecoforestry.application/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00134-8ISSN: 0921-8009EISSN: 1873-6106https://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/27411engInternational Society for Ecological Economics (ISEE)Elvevier46No. 133Ecological EconomicsVol. 34Ecological Economics, ISSN: 0921-8009;EISSN: 1873-6106, Vol.34, No.1(2000); pp. 33-46 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800900001348Restringido (Acceso a grupos específicos)http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ecEcological Economicsinstname:Universidad del Rosarioreponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocURIncomeNatural capitalAccountingExtraction ceilingEcoforestryConfusing liquidation with income in BC's forests: Economic analysis and the BC forest industryConfundiendo liquidación con ingresos en los bosques de BC: análisis económico y la industria forestal de BCarticleArtículohttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501Green ?, Thomas Leslie10336/27411oai:repository.urosario.edu.co:10336/274112021-06-03 00:50:12.349https://repository.urosario.edu.coRepositorio institucional EdocURedocur@urosario.edu.co
dc.title.spa.fl_str_mv Confusing liquidation with income in BC's forests: Economic analysis and the BC forest industry
dc.title.TranslatedTitle.spa.fl_str_mv Confundiendo liquidación con ingresos en los bosques de BC: análisis económico y la industria forestal de BC
title Confusing liquidation with income in BC's forests: Economic analysis and the BC forest industry
spellingShingle Confusing liquidation with income in BC's forests: Economic analysis and the BC forest industry
Income
Natural capital
Accounting
Extraction ceiling
Ecoforestry
title_short Confusing liquidation with income in BC's forests: Economic analysis and the BC forest industry
title_full Confusing liquidation with income in BC's forests: Economic analysis and the BC forest industry
title_fullStr Confusing liquidation with income in BC's forests: Economic analysis and the BC forest industry
title_full_unstemmed Confusing liquidation with income in BC's forests: Economic analysis and the BC forest industry
title_sort Confusing liquidation with income in BC's forests: Economic analysis and the BC forest industry
dc.subject.keyword.spa.fl_str_mv Income
Natural capital
Accounting
Extraction ceiling
Ecoforestry
topic Income
Natural capital
Accounting
Extraction ceiling
Ecoforestry
description Forest exploitation in British Columbia is currently unsustainable. Economic analysis is frequently used to justify the high rate of cut by documenting the revenue, job and wage benefits of current industrial forestry. However, Hicks’ definition of income implies that it is poor accounting practice to count the consumption of natural capital as income. Yet in BC, economic analysis fails to make adjustments for the consumption of forest capital. Such analysis provides society with misleading signals of future economic prospects. By reference to landscape ecology, conservation biology, forest ecology, and ecosystem-based management, this paper sets out requirements for a forest management regime that maintains forest capital intact and for determining a rate of cut that would likely maintain ecosystem structure and function. This ecologically sustainable rate of cut can be seen as an ‘extraction ceiling’. Extraction beyond this ceiling is considered to involve natural capital consumption. This extraction ceiling is used to divide the proceeds from timber extraction into ‘interest’ and ‘depletion’ streams. The interest stream is consistent with maintaining capital intact, and can be considered true income. The depletion stream involves capital consumption. Basing economic analysis of the forest industry on an extraction ceiling encourages debate about defining sustainable extraction levels and about how to make the transition to sustainable forestry. It also shows that the timber industry overstates its contribution to government revenues and to the province’s economic well-being. Critics of industrial forestry in BC have yet to take full advantage of how proper accounting for natural capital depletion can show the advantages to moving towards an ecoforestry approach. By insisting that economists make adjustments where natural capital depletion is projected to occur, advocates of ecoforestry can ensure a more level playing field for the comparison of industrial forestry and ecoforestry.
publishDate 2000
dc.date.created.spa.fl_str_mv 2000-07
dc.date.accessioned.none.fl_str_mv 2020-08-19T14:42:05Z
dc.date.available.none.fl_str_mv 2020-08-19T14:42:05Z
dc.type.eng.fl_str_mv article
dc.type.coarversion.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
dc.type.coar.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
dc.type.spa.spa.fl_str_mv Artículo
dc.identifier.doi.none.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00134-8
dc.identifier.issn.none.fl_str_mv ISSN: 0921-8009
EISSN: 1873-6106
dc.identifier.uri.none.fl_str_mv https://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/27411
url https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00134-8
https://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/27411
identifier_str_mv ISSN: 0921-8009
EISSN: 1873-6106
dc.language.iso.spa.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.citationEndPage.none.fl_str_mv 46
dc.relation.citationIssue.none.fl_str_mv No. 1
dc.relation.citationStartPage.none.fl_str_mv 33
dc.relation.citationTitle.none.fl_str_mv Ecological Economics
dc.relation.citationVolume.none.fl_str_mv Vol. 34
dc.relation.ispartof.spa.fl_str_mv Ecological Economics, ISSN: 0921-8009;EISSN: 1873-6106, Vol.34, No.1(2000); pp. 33-46
dc.relation.uri.spa.fl_str_mv https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800900001348
dc.rights.coar.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec
dc.rights.acceso.spa.fl_str_mv Restringido (Acceso a grupos específicos)
rights_invalid_str_mv Restringido (Acceso a grupos específicos)
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec
dc.format.mimetype.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.spa.fl_str_mv International Society for Ecological Economics (ISEE)
Elvevier
dc.source.spa.fl_str_mv Ecological Economics
institution Universidad del Rosario
dc.source.instname.none.fl_str_mv instname:Universidad del Rosario
dc.source.reponame.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocUR
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositorio institucional EdocUR
repository.mail.fl_str_mv edocur@urosario.edu.co
_version_ 1814167527190691840