- Email: [email protected]
Valuing the non-timber forest products in the Mediterranean region
EC O LO GIC A L E CO N O M ICS 6 3 ( 2 00 7 ) 7 6 8 –7 75
a v a i l a b l e a t w w w. s c i e n c e d i r e c t . c o m
w w w. e l s e v i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / e c o l e c o n
ANALYSIS
Valuing the non-timber forest products in the Mediterranean region Lelia Croitoru⁎ World Bank, Middle East and North Africa Region, 1818 H St., NW Washington DC 20433, United States
AR TIC LE I N FO
ABS TR ACT
Article history:
The potential of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) in the Mediterranean region as a source
Received 10 March 2006
of livelihood and sustainable development has been widely recognized. Yet, surprisingly
Received in revised form
few efforts have been made to value them comprehensively. Valuation efforts usually
24 January 2007
focused on selected NTFPs traded on formal markets, at local level. This paper aims to
Accepted 25 January 2007
provide comprehensive estimates of NTFPs benefits at national and regional level in the
Available online 21 March 2007
Mediterranean region. Six major groups of NTFPs are identified: firewood, cork, fodder, mushrooms, honey and other NTFPs. Valuation is based on a wide variety of techniques,
Keywords:
drawing on official statistics, and supplemented by results of local surveys. It shows that at
Non-timber forest products (NTFPs)
Mediterranean level, NTFPs provide annual benefits of about €39/ha of forests, accounting
Mediterranean forests
for about a fourth of the total economic value of forests estimated by this study. The average estimate for southern countries (€54/ha) is considerably higher than for northern (€41/ha) and eastern countries (€20/ha). The paper reveals the degree of importance of the main NTFPs benefits for the country groups and the region as a whole. It also discusses some reasons of concern when drawing policy tools for improving rural income and forest conservation in the Mediterranean. © 2007 Published by Elsevier B.V.
1.
Introduction
Mediterranean forests supply a diversity of non-timber forest products (NTFPs). Some, such as honey in Lebanon and fodder in Algeria contribute substantially to the welfare of many rural people. Others play a key role in national economies: for example cork contributes about 3% of Portugal's gross domestic product (based on Mendes, 2005). Some other NTFPs are believed to have a strong potential to improve welfare and rural development in many Mediterranean countries. They however fail to do so, partly because their value is not fully recognized by decision-makers.
⁎ Fax: +1 202 477 1981. E-mail address: [email protected]. 0921-8009/$ - see front matter © 2007 Published by Elsevier B.V. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.01.014
The limited recognition of NTFPs is often due to insufficient knowledge regarding their importance and value. Statistical data at the national level are usually incomplete, scattered or not comparable among countries (Vantomme, 2003). In particular, there is little reliable information on NTFPs traded on thin local markets and those consumed for subsistence (Gram, 2001; Bishop, 1999). In the Mediterranean region, the lack of data is particularly high in the southern and eastern countries, where a large portion of NTFPs escapes formal markets. The situation often poses economic and environmental challenges. It may make deforestation for alternative land uses appear more attractive; or may lead to specific NTFPs being harvested at
EC O L O G IC A L E C O N O M IC S 6 3 ( 2 0 07 ) 76 8 –7 75
unsustainable rates, resulting in resource depletion or environmental damage (e.g. soil erosion). These situations often result in losses of welfare and NTFPs benefits in the long run. So far, most efforts to estimate these benefits have focused only on products traded in formal markets (Grimes et al., 1994; Kumari, 1995). More recent attempts have also sought to capture the value of some NTFPs that are consumed for subsistence or informally traded (Shone and Caviglia-Harris, 2006; Murthy et al., 2005; Belcher et al., 2005; Godoy et al., 2000). The bulk of the literature to date has mostly concentrated on tropical forests in Latin America, but the last decade has witnessed a growing interest in NTFPs valuation also in Africa (see Ambrose-Oji, 2003) and Asia (see Mahapatra and Tewari, 2005; Delang, 2006). Most attempts to value NTFPs have been undertaken at the local level. To estimate the contribution of NTFPs to social and economic well-being, estimates at broader scales are needed (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000). Yet only a few studies have sought to value the NTFPs benefits at national level, such as in Mexico (Adger et al., 1995). This paper aims to partly fill this gap, by providing comprehensive estimates of NTFPs in the Mediterranean region. It is a result of a study (MEDFOREX) aiming to estimate the total economic value of forests in each Mediterranean country. The novelty of this study arises not from its use of valuation, but from undertaking it on a large scale (national and regional) within a structured framework that allows for estimates to be aggregated within countries and compared across countries. The paper first describes the scope and specific objectives of the study. It then summarizes the methods and approaches used for valuation. The estimates are discussed at country, cross-country and Mediterranean levels. Finally, the paper presents some key issues for an improved forest policy in the Mediterranean region.
2.
Scope and objectives
There is no single definition of the concept of NTFPs. Some authors refer to NTFPs very restrictively, limiting the concept to the extractive uses of plants (other than timber) growing in the forest. Within this definition, some only refer to products collected from the wild, others include also managed or cultivated products; while others include also wildlife benefits (Belcher, 2003; Belcher et al., 2005). Other authors use a much broader concept of Non-Timber Forest Benefits (Lampietti and Dixon, 1995; Bishop, 1999) or Non-Timber Values (Raunikar and Buongiorno, 2006) that includes also the value of forest services. In this paper, the term NTFPs refers to plants growing in the forest, including managed products. Six major categories of NTFPs are found in the Mediterranean forests: firewood, cork, fodder for grazing, mushrooms, honey and other NTFPs. The last category covers a variety of fruits and plants, which are usually found in smaller amounts than the five main NTFPs. The value of NTFPs is estimated as part of a broader study that aimed to value all forest benefits in the Mediterranean region. The study covers eighteen countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea, divided into three country groups: – southern Mediterranean: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt;
769
– eastern Mediterranean: Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey and Cyprus; and – northern Mediterranean: Greece, Albania, Croatia, Slovenia, Italy, France, Spain and Portugal. Initially, the study aimed to focus specifically on Mediterranean forest types. However, as data distinguished Mediterranean forests from other forest types only in Croatia and France, the scope of the study was extended to cover all forests in the countries surveyed. The study estimates the annual flows of NTFPs benefits and refer them to 2005 current prices, based on the most updated information available in each country. For a better comparability of the results, this paper uses average values of benefits expressed in Euro per hectare of forests. These averages are calculated by dividing the national level estimates to the total forest area in each country.
3.
Valuation methodology
Valuation of NTFPs is based on available secondary data in each country. It uses of a wide array of valuation techniques as developed by the environmental economics literature (Dixon et al., 1994; Braden and Kolstad, 1991; Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 1995; Winpenny, 1991). Estimating the value of NTFPs is usually harder than that of timber benefits. While several NTFPs are commercialized in established markets, for which quantities and prices are usually known, for most other NTFPs however, these data are not so readily available. Some NTFPs such as firewood, are traded in small informal markets with considerable intracountry variation in quantities and prices. Others, such as mushrooms, although marketable, are often harvested and consumed for free. This section summarizes briefly the application of the valuation methods in relation to the forests in the Mediterranean region (Fig. 1).
3.1.
Firewood
Valuation considers the quantity traded in the market and, when available, that collected for free. Ideally, the stumpage price1 should be used to value firewood. However, as data on the average stumpage price at national level are not available in many countries, the roadside price is used. To a certain degree, this results in overestimation, as it includes the costs of extraction and transport to the roadside. The value of firewood collected for free is estimated using data on quantities collected by forest users, either legally (as in Tunisia) or illegally (as in Morocco and Turkey). In both cases, valuation is based on shadow prices: using the market price of similar goods (firewood sold in other areas in Morocco and Tunisia) or the real market prices after eliminating distortions (in Turkey).
3.2.
Cork
Valuation focuses on three types of cork: virgin, reproductive and miscellaneous. The estimation uses the quantities 1
The roadside price net of the transport and extraction costs.
770
EC O LO GIC A L E CO N O M ICS 6 3 ( 2 00 7 ) 7 6 8 –7 75
Fig. 1 – Methods for valuing non-timber forest products in the Mediterranean region. Notes:1 in Morocco, Tunisia, Syria and Turkey;2 in Lebanon and Syria;3 in Tunisia;4 in Tunisia and Lebanon;5 in Croatia and Italy.
traded on the market and the market price for each type of product.
3.3.
productivity during that specific period. In the absence of this information, using estimates of average honey productivity in forests and extrapolating to the total forest area.
Fodder for grazing 3.6.
Fodder is usually consumed by animals grazing in forests. Grazing is practiced either for free, as a public right of local communities, or against a token tax paid by forest users to local authorities. As taxes are usually nominal fees, they do not reflect the real value of grazing. Therefore, fodder for grazing is estimated based on the substitute goods approach. The quantity of fodder annually grazed in forests is converted into forage units (FU) and barley equivalent, based on a comparison of nutrients content (1 FU ∼ 1 kg of barley). The market price of barley is used, after adjusting for distortions (such as subsidies).
3.4.
Mushrooms
Collection of mushrooms is usually regulated by local authorities through permits, allowing free collection up to a limit. In most countries, valuation is based on the quantities traded in the market and their local prices. The value of mushrooms collected for free could be estimated only in Croatia and Italy, using best-guess assumptions on the quantities collected and the market prices of similar goods (mushrooms traded in other areas of the countries analysed).
3.5.
Honey
Valuation is based on the quantities produced by the beehives placed in the forests and average market prices. In most countries, available data on the quantity of honey produced inside and outside forests is usually found in aggregated form. The quantity of honey produced in forests is estimated using data on the number of beehives placed in the forests and their
Other NTFPs
This category includes plants widely found in the forests, such as chestnuts, berries, acorns, and medicinal plants. It also includes products characteristic of individual countries and areas, such as tan bark from Acacia mollissima in Morocco and alfa (Stipa tenacissima) in Algeria. The value of the NTFPs traded in the market are generally estimated based on the quantities traded and their market price. However, markets for these products are so thin in several southern and eastern countries, that both market prices and quantities traded escape statistics. As a result, only a partial valuation could be undertaken. When market price data are not available, cost-based approaches are used. For example, the value of carob in Lebanon is estimated based on the opportunity cost of labour; while the value of myrtle and rosemary in Tunisia are estimated using the costs of harvest and harvest fees. In one case only, the substitute goods approach is used, to estimate the value of acorns in Tunisia, based on the market value of an equivalent product (barley). In some cases, the only data available are for a subset of production, such as carob exports in Lebanon. Estimates based on this information clearly underestimate the real value of these products. In other cases, as for other NTFPs in Lebanon, potential yield and average market prices are used, thus obtaining the gross potential value of the product. These estimates run the risk of being highly overvalued. For products consumed for subsistence or traded in informal markets, quantity estimates are taken from expert opinion, and valued using local market prices (e.g. medicinal plants in Lebanon). The valuation effort encountered difficulties in terms of data availability when passing from market to non-market
771
EC O L O G IC A L E C O N O M IC S 6 3 ( 2 0 07 ) 76 8 –7 75
NTFPs and, in particular, when moving from northern to southern and eastern countries. It should be noted that data limitations are a problem encountered in valuation studies worldwide. A recent World Bank (2005) study estimating the cost of deforestation in Iran, found no data on NTFPs, except for firewood sold on the market. Thus, it estimated the value of NTFPs using benefits transfer from a neighbouring country with similar forest conditions, Turkey (Türker et al., 2005).
4.
Valuing the non-timber forest products
The estimates for NTFPs vary largely from area to area, depending on the specific forest context and data availability. The estimates obtained at national level were weighted according to each country forest areas to obtain the average values for each group of countries. Table 1 presents the results of the analysis for the eighteen countries studied, as well as the averages for groups of countries and the Mediterranean as a whole.
4.1.
Firewood
Firewood is an important NTFP throughout the Mediterranean region. In most southern and eastern countries, firewood
collection is prevalent in total wood removals, reaching some 80–100% in Tunisia, Morocco, and Lebanon. Illegal collection of firewood is often common practice, and can account for as much as 69% of total firewood collection (in Morocco). In many southern and eastern countries however, estimates of illegal harvests are not available, thus generating underestimates of firewood benefits. The estimated value of firewood averages about €11/ha in each of the northern and southern country groups. Firewood is the most important NTFP in northern countries, along with grazing; and the second most important in southern countries. It should be noted however that the average estimate for southern countries is driven by the high quantity and prices of firewood in Morocco, the most forested country of the area. If Morocco were omitted, the average value of firewood in the southern and eastern countries would drop to less than €3/ha.
4.2.
Cork
Cork is a significant product in the western part of the Mediterranean. However, cork production has diminished substantially in recent decades. In many maghreb countries, deforestation and overgrazing have contributed to reducing the cork oak area. In many Western European countries, cork production has decreased as a result of both forest abandonment
Table 1 – The value of NTFPs per country group (Euro/ha, 2005 prices) Firewood
Grazing
Cork
Mushrooms
Honey
Other NTFPs
Total NTFPs
Southern Morocco Algeria Tunisia Egypt Average southern
17 0 3 7 11
31 36 81 ND 35
1 1 11 NA 2
1 ND 0 ND 1
4 0 2 97 3
1 0 12 ND 1
54 38 109 104 54
Eastern Palestine Israel Lebanon Syria Turkey Cyprus Average eastern
4 ND 31 0 3 0 3
24 ND 8 ND 12 ND 12
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ND 0 ND ND 1 ND 1
ND ND 98 0 ND 10 NC
27 ND 5a 7 4 6 4
55 NA 142 8 19 15 20
Northern Greece Albania Croatia Slovenia Italy France Spain Portugal Average northern Mediterranean
6 3 14 11 29 18 2 12 11 9
38 20 5 ND 8 ND 9 37 11 15
NA 0 NA NA 1 0 2 130 9 7
ND ND 1 4 11 ND 3 5 3 2
8 ND 1 5 3 ND ND 3 1 1
0 0 2 19 11 9b 2 19 6 5
52 23 23 40 62 27 17 206 41 39
Based on data collected within MEDFOREX project (Croitoru and Merlo, 2005). ND = no data available; NA = not applicable; NC = not calculated due to insufficient relevant information. Estimating the average values of individual benefits per group of countries (last column) was based on two considerations: (i) only the countries providing estimates were included in the weighted area average; (ii) the average obtained was considered representative for a country group only if the aggregated forest area of the countries providing the estimates was at least 50% of the total forest area of that country group. a Includes carob. Pine nuts and medicinal plants are not included due to a likely overestimation (see text). b Includes truffles, miscellaneous and other fruits.
772
EC O LO GIC A L E CO N O M ICS 6 3 ( 2 00 7 ) 7 6 8 –7 75
and the development of substitutes (e.g. plastic). The highest value of cork is found in Portugal (€130/ha of forests, or about €600/ha of cork oak area), the world's leading cork producer. Cork is the second most important NTFP in Tunisia, where it generates about €11/ha (∼€218/ha of cork oak area), much of which is received by the local communities. The role of cork in the other countries is much smaller.
4.3.
Fodder for grazing
In the past, grazing was a significant activity throughout the Mediterranean. In the last decades, however, the importance of grazing has diminished in many northern countries, especially in Western Europe. In contrast, grazing in forests remains significant in the southern and eastern Mediterranean. In fact, in this area, intensive grazing is common, causing long-term negative effects, such as soil erosion and decreasing fodder productivity. In many eastern countries, fodder productivity has declined to about 70–130 FU/ha in Lebanon and Turkey and as little as 30 FU/ha in Syria. Fodder production is comparatively higher in most northern countries, lying within 120–635 FU/ha. Using a shadow price of about €0.1–0.2/kg of barley, high estimated values of €30–80/ha are found in the southern countries. Relatively high estimates, of about €37/ha, are found also in the Portuguese montados and in Greece, where grazing remains a traditional rural activity. The importance of grazing in the other countries is substantially lower.
4.4.
Mushrooms
In the Western European countries, a large part of mushroom production is a by-product of recreational activities, enjoyed by visitors and society as a whole. Overall, the estimated mushroom benefits are highest in the northern countries, averaging about €3/ha. The value of mushrooms could not be estimated in most eastern countries. The lack of data does not imply the lack of mushrooms; rather, it shows that a large share of mushrooms is collected for free and sold on thin local markets, for which quantities and prices are not known.
Fig. 2 – Average NTFPs benefits in the Mediterranean region (2005 prices).
value of the maximum sustainable yield is used and extrapolated to the entire forest area. As such, this estimate likely substantially overestimates the real value of the current harvest of NTFPs. Similarly, the average estimate of medicinal plants in Lebanon (€135/ha) is likely to be overvalued. These estimates are therefore omitted when calculating the average value of NTFPs for the eastern country group and for the Mediterranean as a whole. In addition to the overestimation cases, there were instances when NTFPs could be only partially estimated (e.g. mushrooms in Tunisia) or not valued at all (e.g. firewood collected for free in most countries). The estimation gaps often led to high differences in average values of a particular benefit or of the total economic value for different countries. For example, the estimated total economic value of NTFPs in Lebanon (€142/ha) is much higher compared to that of other eastern countries (€8–55/ha). These differences most likely reduce the possibility of internal validation of available estimates; moreover, they tend to limit the degree of transferability of these estimates to other countries with similar forest contexts.
5. 4.5.
Honey
The highest value of honey, of about €98/ha, is found in Lebanon, as a result of the high local prices, and in Egypt, as an important honey producer worldwide. It should be noted however that these high values per hectare of forests are also a result of the small forest areas in Lebanon and Egypt. Honey is also relatively important in Slovenia, Cyprus and Greece (about €5–10/ha), but plays a negligible role in other countries.
4.6.
Other NTFPs
As with mushrooms, the data on the quantities and prices of other NTFPs are more readily available in northern countries. As a result, their average value is highest in these countries (€6/ha). Estimated values are much lower in the other country groups, mainly due to data scarcity. An extremely high value of about €430/ha was found in Lebanon for pine nuts only. As previously noted, in absence of more accurate data the gross
Discussion
If the estimated values of NTFPs are weighted according to each country's forest area, the average benefit of NTFPs in the Mediterranean is about €39/ha in 2005 (Fig. 2). The average estimate for southern countries (€54/ha) is considerably higher than that for northern (€41/ha) and eastern (€20/ha) countries. The high value for the south is mostly a result of grazing benefits, which alone account for about 65% of the per hectare NTFPs for this country group. This result is remarkable: despite the data limitations for several NTFPs (e.g. mushrooms, other NTFPs), the average estimated value of NTFPs in southern countries is higher than in the northern countries, where data for many other NTFPs are more readily available. Overall, grazing is the most notable benefit for all country groups. However, its importance relative to that of other NTFPs differs from one country group to another. In most southern and eastern countries, the estimated value of grazing stands out as the single most important benefit, while the estimates for the other products are considerably lower. In contrast, in northern countries, grazing and firewood are both relatively
EC O L O G IC A L E C O N O M IC S 6 3 ( 2 0 07 ) 76 8 –7 75
significant (27% of total NTFPs value each), closely followed by cork and other NTFPs. Many other NTFPs are found to be important, particularly in southern and eastern countries, where a large share of population depends on forests. Firewood collected for subsistence accounts for about 21% of the total value of NTFPs in Morocco, for example (based on Ellatifi, 2005). The estimated values of NTFPs in the Mediterranean are comparable to those obtained in other parts of the world. An early study (Peters et al., 1989) calculated the benefits of NTFPs harvested from a tropical forest in Peru to be worth as much as €480/ha/year2 (US$422/ha/year). Although many have argued that this particular estimate is an over-estimate (Godoy, 1992; Pendleton, 1992; Pinedo-Vásquez et al., 1992; Chomitz and Kumari, 1998), recent studies indicate that NTFPs can yield non-negligible returns. For example, studies undertaken in Latin America suggest annual ranges of values of €16–21/ha (US$18–24/ha) in the tropical forests of Honduras (Godoy et al., 2000) and of €19–39/ha (US$17–35/ha) in the rainforests of Brazil (Shone and Caviglia-Harris, 2006). This study's estimates for the Mediterranean countries fall within or close to these ranges. Other studies provide much wider ranges of estimates. A recent review of 61 cases of commercial NTFPs production in Africa, Asia and Latin America finds NTFPs benefits ranging between €0.3–135/ha/year (US$0.4–160.5/ha/year) (Belcher et al., 2005). It is commonly argued that these variations are influenced by various factors, such as the differences in the studies' objectives, methodology, assumptions, site biology, type of management and number of goods valued (Godoy and Lubowski, 1992; Lampietti and Dixon, 1995). The study from which these results are drawn (MEDFOREX) also estimated the value of other benefits provided by forests, such as hunting, recreation, watershed protection, carbon sequestration, and biodiversity conservation. The study then aggregated these values and estimated the Total Economic Value (TEV) of forests for each country, groups of countries and the Mediterranean region as a whole. The estimates thus obtained are taken as conservative, in that they do not capture specific categories of benefits (especially non-use values) for some countries. Bearing in mind these considerations, it is interesting to discuss the importance of the NTFPs in the estimated value of forests. At the Mediterranean level, NTFPs contribute 26% of the estimated forest TEV. The importance of NTFPs varies widely between country groups. NTFPs contribute about 73% to the estimated TEV of forests in southern countries, and some 38% in the eastern countries. As previously stated, this is mainly driven by the importance of grazing benefits. The apparent importance of NTFPs in this part of the Mediterranean is also partly due to the lack of estimates for other types of benefits, especially non-market benefits, however. In the northern countries, NTFPs represent only 20% of the forests' TEV; here, the importance of NTFPs is dwarfed by that of other forest benefits, such as recreation, watershed protection and timber. In per capita terms, NTFPs provide benefits of €9 annually to people living in the region. Average benefits are higher in 2 For comparability, the estimates obtained in these studies were updated to 2005 Euros. The original estimates expressed in dollars in the reference year are found between brackets.
773
Fig. 3 – Relationship between per capita forest area and per capita NTFPs benefits.
northern countries (€15/capita) compared to the southern (€5/capita) and eastern countries (€4/capita). It should be noted that per capita benefits depend not only on the benefits per hectare of forests, but also on the forest area and population size in each country group. Fig. 3 shows that countries with less than 0.1 ha/capita, generally from the southern and eastern groups, are associated with the lowest per capita NTFPs benefits. The per capita benefits tend to be substantially higher in the northern countries with more than 0.5 ha of forests/ capita. However, it should be recalled that part of this difference is due to a greater underestimation of benefits in the southern and eastern groups.
6.
Final considerations
This study attempted to estimate comprehensively the overall value of NTFPs and of individual categories of NTFPs at national and regional level in the Mediterranean region. The valuation effort aimed to follow a consistent methodology so as to provide comparable estimates within and across countries. It should be noted however that, as a first time effort to estimate a variety of NTFPs at such a large scale, this study was often subject to constraints. At the empirical level, data limitations prevented some countries from estimating particular categories of benefits. For example, free collection of firewood – legal and illegal – though notable in most southern and eastern countries, could be estimated only in a few. Even when estimates could be obtained, the approaches are not always fully comparable across countries. For example, some estimates are based on national level data, while others result from transferring a benefit obtained in small areas to larger areas where that particular benefit is produced. Realistically, these constraints are unavoidable in any valuation study that goes beyond the level of a single, specific plot, and particularly in studies focused on such a large scale. To a certain extent, they also tend to distort the overall results at national and regional levels. Thus, these estimates should not be taken as precise values for these areas. Rather, they have indicative significance, as orders of magnitude, and are meant to provoke further refinements. Despite these constraints, it is interesting to discuss these estimates in relation to the institutional and policy contexts
774
EC O LO GIC A L E CO N O M ICS 6 3 ( 2 00 7 ) 7 6 8 –7 75
in the region. In southern and eastern Mediterranean countries, most forests are publicly owned. Forest communities havesome free usage rights (e.g. collection of firewood, grazing, etc), but often have little incentive to preserve forests. In addition, a large share of the rural population is poor and depends on forest benefits as the major source of income. A recent study in Tunisia (Daly-Hassen and Ben Mansoura, 2005) shows that in Skhira area of Sejnane county, NTFPs – raising livestock, charcoal making, honey making, tobacco cropping – contributed as much as 73% of household income in 1999. The study reports that in several other areas, the poor are disproportionately dependent on NTFPs. In many cases, this results in excessive pressure on forests through over exploitation of NTFPs such as firewood and fodder, or in deforestation for conversion to alternative land uses (usually agriculture). In Morocco, for example, the rate of deforestation is said to be 31,000 ha/year, while illegal exploitation of firewood is twice the legal amount (Ellatifi, 2005). These practices are quite common in rural areas of the southern and eastern Mediterranean and can cause substantial damage such as erosion that affects the downstream communities. These situations call for finding tools to improve the development of these areas, both from the socio-economic and environmental standpoints. The estimates show that in many southern and eastern countries, the value of NTFPs far exceed that of timber. This situation, common in other parts of the world, has encouraged the belief that commercialization of NTFPs could be a way to both alleviate poverty and promote their sustainable use worldwide (Nepstad and Schwartzman, 1992; Panayotou and Ashton, 1992; Moussouris and Regato, 1999). It should be noted however that recent research has questioned the real potential of NTFPs commercialization to achieve both objectives. For example, Arnold and Ruiz Pérez (2001) argue that the initiatives of commercialization may result in the short-term over-use (if not depletion) of the NTFPs demanded in the market; besides, they often help the wealthier rather than the poorer who do not have the skills and technologies so as to benefit from market opportunities. These are only a few of a wide range of concerns that need to be looked at when searching for ways of improving both livelihood and conservation. Most research trying to find the right answer is inconclusive, reflecting the complexity of the issues at stake. In a recent overview, Sunderlin et al. (2005) concludes that the reconciliation between the two objectives should be supported by site-level research integrated with a good understanding of the society-wide effects. Though this discussion is mostly based on case studies in Latin America, there is plenty of scope to consider it also for the Mediterranean region.
Acknowledgements This paper is a result of MEDFOREX project, started by the European Forest Institute (EFI), Finland and Solsona Forest Technology Centre, Spain and carried out by Padua University CONTAGRAF Centre. The author acknowledges the outstanding contribution of Professor Maurizio Merlo, the main coordinator of the project until he sadly passed away in August 2003. Acknowledgements and special thanks are given also to the following scientists: Mohammed Ellatifi (Morocco);
Abdellah Nédjahi, Mohamed Zamoum (Algeria); Hamed DalyHassen, Ameur Ben Mansoura, (Tunisia); Roubina Ghattas, Nader Hrimat and Jad Isaac (Palestine); Avi Gafni (Israel); Elsa Sattout, Salma Talhouk, Nader Kabbani (Lebanon); Ibrahim Nahal, Salim Zahoueh (Syria); Mustafa Fehmi Turker, Mehmet Pak, Atakan Ozturk (Turkey); Department of Forests (Cyprus); Vassiliki Kazana, Angelos Kazaklis (Greece); Kostandin Dano (Albania); Rudolf Sabadi, Diana Vuletiæ, Joso Gracan (Croatia); Robert Mavsar, Lado Kutnar, Marko Kovac (Slovenia); Paola Gatto, Paolo Paiero (Italy); Claire Montagné, Jean-Luc Peyron, Alexandra Niedzwiedz and Odile Colnard (France); Pablo Campos Palacin, Enrique Sanjurjo, Alejandro Caparros (Spain); Américo Carvalho Mendes (Portugal). Special thanks are given also to Grant Milne, World Bank, for the constructive comments to this paper.
REFERENCES Adger, N., Brown, K., Cervigni, R., Moran, D., 1995. Total economic value of forests in Mexico. Ambio 24 (5), 286–296. Ambrose-Oji, B., 2003. The contribution of NTFPs to the livelihoods of the ‘forest poor’: evidence from the tropical forest zone of south-west Cameroon. International Forestry Review 5 (2), 106–117. Arnold, J.E.M., Ruiz Pérez, M., 2001. Can non-timber forest products match tropical forest conservation and development objectives? Ecological Economics 39, 437–447. Belcher, B.M., 2003. What isn't a NTFP? International Forestry Review 5 (2), 161–168. Belcher, B., Ruiz Pérez, M., Achdiawan, R., 2005. Global patterns and trends in the use and management of commercial NTFPs: implications for livelihoods and conservation. World Development 33 (9), 1435–1452. Bishop, J.T. (Ed.), 1999. Valuing Forests: A Review of Methods and Applications in Developing Countries. International Institute for Environment and Development, London. 48 pp. Braden, J.B., Kolstad, C.D. (Eds.), 1991. Measuring the Demand for Environmental Quality. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 17–28. Chomitz, K.M., Kumari, K., 1998. The domestic benefits of tropical forests: a critical review. The World Bank Research Observer 13 (1), 13–35. Croitoru, L., Merlo, M., 2005. Mediterranean Forest Values. In: Merlo, M., Croitoru, L. (Eds.), Valuing Mediterranean Forests: Towards Total Economic Value. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxon, pp. 105–122. Daly-Hassen, H., Ben Mansoura, A., 2005. Tunisia. In: Merlo, M., Croitoru, L. (Eds.), Valuing Mediterranean Forests: Towards Total Economic Value. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxon, pp. 105–122. Delang, C., 2006. Not just minor forest products: the economic rationale for the consumption of wild food plants by subsistence farmers, Ecological Economics 59 (1), 64–73. Dixon, J.A., Scura, L.F., Carpenter, L.A., Sherman, P.B., 1994. Economic Analysis of Environmental Impacts. Earthscan, London. Ellatifi, M., 2005. Morocco. In: Merlo, M., Croitoru, L. (Eds.), Valuing Mediterranean Forests: Towards Total Economic Value. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxon, pp. 69–87. Godoy, R., 1992. Some organizing principles in the valuation of tropical forests. Forest Ecology and Management 50, 174–175. Godoy, R., Lubowski, R., 1992. Guidelines for the economic valuation of non timber tropical forest products. Current Anthropology 33, 423–433. Godoy, R., Wilkie, D., Overman, H., Cubas, A., Cubas, G., Demmer, J., Mcsweeney, K., Brokaw, N., 2000. Valuation of consumption
EC O L O G IC A L E C O N O M IC S 6 3 ( 2 0 07 ) 76 8 –7 75
and sale of forest goods from a central American rain forest. Nature 406, 62–63. Gram, S., 2001. Economic valuation of special forest products: an assessment of methodological shortcomings. Ecological Economics 36, 109–117. Grimes, A., Loomis, S., Jahnige, P., Burnham, M., Onthank, K., Alarcón, R., Cuenca, W., Martinez, C., Neill, D., Balick, M., Bennett, B., Mendelsohn, R., 1994. Valuing the rain forest: the economic value of nontimber forest products in Ecuador. Ambio 23 (7), 405–410. Kumari, K., 1995. An Environmental and Economic Assessment of Forest Management Options: A Case Study in Malaysia. Environment Department Papers, Environmental Economics Series, Paper, vol. 26. World Bank, Washington DC, p. 49. Lampietti, J., Dixon, J., 1995. To See the Forest for the Trees: A Guide to Non-timber Forest Benefits. Environment Department Papers, Paper, vol. 13. World Bank, Washington DC, p. 32. Mahapatra, A.K., Tewari, D.D., 2005. Importance of non-timber forest products in the economic valuation of dry deciduous forests of India. Forest Policy and Economics 7, 455–467. Mendes, A., 2005. Portugal. In: Merlo, M., Croitoru, L. (Eds.), Valuing Mediterranean forests: Towards Total Economic Value. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, pp. 331–352. Moussouris, Y., Regato, P., 1999. Forest harvest: Mediterranean woodlands and the importance of non-timber forest products to forest conservation, Arborvitae October 1999, IUCN and WWF. Murthy, I.K., Bhat, P.R., Ravindrabath, N.H., Sukumar, R., 2005. Financial valuation of non-timber forest product flows in Uttara Kannada district, Western Ghats, Karnataka. Current Science 88 (10), 1573–1579. Nepstad, D.C., Schwartzman, S., 1992. Introduction: non-timber products from tropical forests: evaluation of a conservation and development strategy. In: Nepstad, D.C., Swartzman, S. (Eds.), Non-timber Products from Tropical Forests: Evaluation of a Conservation and Development Strategy. Advances in Economic Botany, vol. 9, pp. vii–xii. Neumann, R.P., Hirsch, E., 2000. Commercialisation of Non-timber Forest Products: Review and Analysis of the Research. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia, p. 176.
775
Panayotou, T., Ashton, P., 1992. Not by Timber Alone. Economics and Ecology for Sustaining Tropical Forests. Island Press, Washington, DC, p. 302. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 1995. The Economic Appraisal of Environmental Projects and Policies – A Practical Guide. OECD, Paris. Pendleton, L., 1992. Trouble in paradise: practical obstacles to non-timber forestry in Latin America. In: Plotkin, M., Famolare, L. (Eds.), Sustainable Harvest and Marketing of Rain Forest Products. Island Press, Washington D.C., USA, pp. 252–262. Peters, C.M., Gentry, A.H., Mendelssohn, R.O., 1989. Valuation of an Amazonian rainforest. Nature 339, 655–656. Pinedo-Vásquez, M., Zarin, D., Jipp, P., 1992. Economic returns from forest conversion in the Peruvian Amazon. Ecological Economics 6, 163–177. Raunikar, R., Buongiorno, J., 2006. Willingness to pay for forest amenities: the case of non-industrial owners in south central United States. Ecological Economics 56, 132–143. Shone, B.M., Caviglia-Harris, J.L., 2006. Quantifying and comparing the value of non-timber forest products in the Amazon, Ecological Economics 58, 249–267. Sunderlin, W.D., Angelsen, A., Belcher, B., Burgers, P., Nasi, R., Santoso, L., Wünder, S., 2005. Livelihoods, forests and conservation in developing countries: an overview. World Development 33 (9), 1383–1402. Türker, M., Pak, M., Öztürk, A., 2005. Turkey. In: Merlo, M., Croitoru, L. (Eds.), Valuing Mediterranean Forests: Towards Total Economic Value. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxon, pp. 195–211. Vantomme, P., 2003. Compiling statistics on non-wood forest products as policy and decision-making tools at national level. International Forestry Review 5 (2), 156–160. Winpenny, J.T., 1991. Values for the Environment. A Guide to Economic Appraisal. Overseas Development Institute. HMSO, London. World Bank, 2005. Islamic Republic of Iran. Cost Assessment of Environmental Degradation. Report N° 32043-IR, Rural Development, Water and Environment Department, Middle East and North Africa Region. Washington DC, p. 68 + Annexes.
a v a i l a b l e a t w w w. s c i e n c e d i r e c t . c o m
w w w. e l s e v i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / e c o l e c o n
ANALYSIS
Valuing the non-timber forest products in the Mediterranean region Lelia Croitoru⁎ World Bank, Middle East and North Africa Region, 1818 H St., NW Washington DC 20433, United States
AR TIC LE I N FO
ABS TR ACT
Article history:
The potential of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) in the Mediterranean region as a source
Received 10 March 2006
of livelihood and sustainable development has been widely recognized. Yet, surprisingly
Received in revised form
few efforts have been made to value them comprehensively. Valuation efforts usually
24 January 2007
focused on selected NTFPs traded on formal markets, at local level. This paper aims to
Accepted 25 January 2007
provide comprehensive estimates of NTFPs benefits at national and regional level in the
Available online 21 March 2007
Mediterranean region. Six major groups of NTFPs are identified: firewood, cork, fodder, mushrooms, honey and other NTFPs. Valuation is based on a wide variety of techniques,
Keywords:
drawing on official statistics, and supplemented by results of local surveys. It shows that at
Non-timber forest products (NTFPs)
Mediterranean level, NTFPs provide annual benefits of about €39/ha of forests, accounting
Mediterranean forests
for about a fourth of the total economic value of forests estimated by this study. The average estimate for southern countries (€54/ha) is considerably higher than for northern (€41/ha) and eastern countries (€20/ha). The paper reveals the degree of importance of the main NTFPs benefits for the country groups and the region as a whole. It also discusses some reasons of concern when drawing policy tools for improving rural income and forest conservation in the Mediterranean. © 2007 Published by Elsevier B.V.
1.
Introduction
Mediterranean forests supply a diversity of non-timber forest products (NTFPs). Some, such as honey in Lebanon and fodder in Algeria contribute substantially to the welfare of many rural people. Others play a key role in national economies: for example cork contributes about 3% of Portugal's gross domestic product (based on Mendes, 2005). Some other NTFPs are believed to have a strong potential to improve welfare and rural development in many Mediterranean countries. They however fail to do so, partly because their value is not fully recognized by decision-makers.
⁎ Fax: +1 202 477 1981. E-mail address: [email protected]. 0921-8009/$ - see front matter © 2007 Published by Elsevier B.V. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.01.014
The limited recognition of NTFPs is often due to insufficient knowledge regarding their importance and value. Statistical data at the national level are usually incomplete, scattered or not comparable among countries (Vantomme, 2003). In particular, there is little reliable information on NTFPs traded on thin local markets and those consumed for subsistence (Gram, 2001; Bishop, 1999). In the Mediterranean region, the lack of data is particularly high in the southern and eastern countries, where a large portion of NTFPs escapes formal markets. The situation often poses economic and environmental challenges. It may make deforestation for alternative land uses appear more attractive; or may lead to specific NTFPs being harvested at
EC O L O G IC A L E C O N O M IC S 6 3 ( 2 0 07 ) 76 8 –7 75
unsustainable rates, resulting in resource depletion or environmental damage (e.g. soil erosion). These situations often result in losses of welfare and NTFPs benefits in the long run. So far, most efforts to estimate these benefits have focused only on products traded in formal markets (Grimes et al., 1994; Kumari, 1995). More recent attempts have also sought to capture the value of some NTFPs that are consumed for subsistence or informally traded (Shone and Caviglia-Harris, 2006; Murthy et al., 2005; Belcher et al., 2005; Godoy et al., 2000). The bulk of the literature to date has mostly concentrated on tropical forests in Latin America, but the last decade has witnessed a growing interest in NTFPs valuation also in Africa (see Ambrose-Oji, 2003) and Asia (see Mahapatra and Tewari, 2005; Delang, 2006). Most attempts to value NTFPs have been undertaken at the local level. To estimate the contribution of NTFPs to social and economic well-being, estimates at broader scales are needed (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000). Yet only a few studies have sought to value the NTFPs benefits at national level, such as in Mexico (Adger et al., 1995). This paper aims to partly fill this gap, by providing comprehensive estimates of NTFPs in the Mediterranean region. It is a result of a study (MEDFOREX) aiming to estimate the total economic value of forests in each Mediterranean country. The novelty of this study arises not from its use of valuation, but from undertaking it on a large scale (national and regional) within a structured framework that allows for estimates to be aggregated within countries and compared across countries. The paper first describes the scope and specific objectives of the study. It then summarizes the methods and approaches used for valuation. The estimates are discussed at country, cross-country and Mediterranean levels. Finally, the paper presents some key issues for an improved forest policy in the Mediterranean region.
2.
Scope and objectives
There is no single definition of the concept of NTFPs. Some authors refer to NTFPs very restrictively, limiting the concept to the extractive uses of plants (other than timber) growing in the forest. Within this definition, some only refer to products collected from the wild, others include also managed or cultivated products; while others include also wildlife benefits (Belcher, 2003; Belcher et al., 2005). Other authors use a much broader concept of Non-Timber Forest Benefits (Lampietti and Dixon, 1995; Bishop, 1999) or Non-Timber Values (Raunikar and Buongiorno, 2006) that includes also the value of forest services. In this paper, the term NTFPs refers to plants growing in the forest, including managed products. Six major categories of NTFPs are found in the Mediterranean forests: firewood, cork, fodder for grazing, mushrooms, honey and other NTFPs. The last category covers a variety of fruits and plants, which are usually found in smaller amounts than the five main NTFPs. The value of NTFPs is estimated as part of a broader study that aimed to value all forest benefits in the Mediterranean region. The study covers eighteen countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea, divided into three country groups: – southern Mediterranean: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt;
769
– eastern Mediterranean: Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey and Cyprus; and – northern Mediterranean: Greece, Albania, Croatia, Slovenia, Italy, France, Spain and Portugal. Initially, the study aimed to focus specifically on Mediterranean forest types. However, as data distinguished Mediterranean forests from other forest types only in Croatia and France, the scope of the study was extended to cover all forests in the countries surveyed. The study estimates the annual flows of NTFPs benefits and refer them to 2005 current prices, based on the most updated information available in each country. For a better comparability of the results, this paper uses average values of benefits expressed in Euro per hectare of forests. These averages are calculated by dividing the national level estimates to the total forest area in each country.
3.
Valuation methodology
Valuation of NTFPs is based on available secondary data in each country. It uses of a wide array of valuation techniques as developed by the environmental economics literature (Dixon et al., 1994; Braden and Kolstad, 1991; Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 1995; Winpenny, 1991). Estimating the value of NTFPs is usually harder than that of timber benefits. While several NTFPs are commercialized in established markets, for which quantities and prices are usually known, for most other NTFPs however, these data are not so readily available. Some NTFPs such as firewood, are traded in small informal markets with considerable intracountry variation in quantities and prices. Others, such as mushrooms, although marketable, are often harvested and consumed for free. This section summarizes briefly the application of the valuation methods in relation to the forests in the Mediterranean region (Fig. 1).
3.1.
Firewood
Valuation considers the quantity traded in the market and, when available, that collected for free. Ideally, the stumpage price1 should be used to value firewood. However, as data on the average stumpage price at national level are not available in many countries, the roadside price is used. To a certain degree, this results in overestimation, as it includes the costs of extraction and transport to the roadside. The value of firewood collected for free is estimated using data on quantities collected by forest users, either legally (as in Tunisia) or illegally (as in Morocco and Turkey). In both cases, valuation is based on shadow prices: using the market price of similar goods (firewood sold in other areas in Morocco and Tunisia) or the real market prices after eliminating distortions (in Turkey).
3.2.
Cork
Valuation focuses on three types of cork: virgin, reproductive and miscellaneous. The estimation uses the quantities 1
The roadside price net of the transport and extraction costs.
770
EC O LO GIC A L E CO N O M ICS 6 3 ( 2 00 7 ) 7 6 8 –7 75
Fig. 1 – Methods for valuing non-timber forest products in the Mediterranean region. Notes:1 in Morocco, Tunisia, Syria and Turkey;2 in Lebanon and Syria;3 in Tunisia;4 in Tunisia and Lebanon;5 in Croatia and Italy.
traded on the market and the market price for each type of product.
3.3.
productivity during that specific period. In the absence of this information, using estimates of average honey productivity in forests and extrapolating to the total forest area.
Fodder for grazing 3.6.
Fodder is usually consumed by animals grazing in forests. Grazing is practiced either for free, as a public right of local communities, or against a token tax paid by forest users to local authorities. As taxes are usually nominal fees, they do not reflect the real value of grazing. Therefore, fodder for grazing is estimated based on the substitute goods approach. The quantity of fodder annually grazed in forests is converted into forage units (FU) and barley equivalent, based on a comparison of nutrients content (1 FU ∼ 1 kg of barley). The market price of barley is used, after adjusting for distortions (such as subsidies).
3.4.
Mushrooms
Collection of mushrooms is usually regulated by local authorities through permits, allowing free collection up to a limit. In most countries, valuation is based on the quantities traded in the market and their local prices. The value of mushrooms collected for free could be estimated only in Croatia and Italy, using best-guess assumptions on the quantities collected and the market prices of similar goods (mushrooms traded in other areas of the countries analysed).
3.5.
Honey
Valuation is based on the quantities produced by the beehives placed in the forests and average market prices. In most countries, available data on the quantity of honey produced inside and outside forests is usually found in aggregated form. The quantity of honey produced in forests is estimated using data on the number of beehives placed in the forests and their
Other NTFPs
This category includes plants widely found in the forests, such as chestnuts, berries, acorns, and medicinal plants. It also includes products characteristic of individual countries and areas, such as tan bark from Acacia mollissima in Morocco and alfa (Stipa tenacissima) in Algeria. The value of the NTFPs traded in the market are generally estimated based on the quantities traded and their market price. However, markets for these products are so thin in several southern and eastern countries, that both market prices and quantities traded escape statistics. As a result, only a partial valuation could be undertaken. When market price data are not available, cost-based approaches are used. For example, the value of carob in Lebanon is estimated based on the opportunity cost of labour; while the value of myrtle and rosemary in Tunisia are estimated using the costs of harvest and harvest fees. In one case only, the substitute goods approach is used, to estimate the value of acorns in Tunisia, based on the market value of an equivalent product (barley). In some cases, the only data available are for a subset of production, such as carob exports in Lebanon. Estimates based on this information clearly underestimate the real value of these products. In other cases, as for other NTFPs in Lebanon, potential yield and average market prices are used, thus obtaining the gross potential value of the product. These estimates run the risk of being highly overvalued. For products consumed for subsistence or traded in informal markets, quantity estimates are taken from expert opinion, and valued using local market prices (e.g. medicinal plants in Lebanon). The valuation effort encountered difficulties in terms of data availability when passing from market to non-market
771
EC O L O G IC A L E C O N O M IC S 6 3 ( 2 0 07 ) 76 8 –7 75
NTFPs and, in particular, when moving from northern to southern and eastern countries. It should be noted that data limitations are a problem encountered in valuation studies worldwide. A recent World Bank (2005) study estimating the cost of deforestation in Iran, found no data on NTFPs, except for firewood sold on the market. Thus, it estimated the value of NTFPs using benefits transfer from a neighbouring country with similar forest conditions, Turkey (Türker et al., 2005).
4.
Valuing the non-timber forest products
The estimates for NTFPs vary largely from area to area, depending on the specific forest context and data availability. The estimates obtained at national level were weighted according to each country forest areas to obtain the average values for each group of countries. Table 1 presents the results of the analysis for the eighteen countries studied, as well as the averages for groups of countries and the Mediterranean as a whole.
4.1.
Firewood
Firewood is an important NTFP throughout the Mediterranean region. In most southern and eastern countries, firewood
collection is prevalent in total wood removals, reaching some 80–100% in Tunisia, Morocco, and Lebanon. Illegal collection of firewood is often common practice, and can account for as much as 69% of total firewood collection (in Morocco). In many southern and eastern countries however, estimates of illegal harvests are not available, thus generating underestimates of firewood benefits. The estimated value of firewood averages about €11/ha in each of the northern and southern country groups. Firewood is the most important NTFP in northern countries, along with grazing; and the second most important in southern countries. It should be noted however that the average estimate for southern countries is driven by the high quantity and prices of firewood in Morocco, the most forested country of the area. If Morocco were omitted, the average value of firewood in the southern and eastern countries would drop to less than €3/ha.
4.2.
Cork
Cork is a significant product in the western part of the Mediterranean. However, cork production has diminished substantially in recent decades. In many maghreb countries, deforestation and overgrazing have contributed to reducing the cork oak area. In many Western European countries, cork production has decreased as a result of both forest abandonment
Table 1 – The value of NTFPs per country group (Euro/ha, 2005 prices) Firewood
Grazing
Cork
Mushrooms
Honey
Other NTFPs
Total NTFPs
Southern Morocco Algeria Tunisia Egypt Average southern
17 0 3 7 11
31 36 81 ND 35
1 1 11 NA 2
1 ND 0 ND 1
4 0 2 97 3
1 0 12 ND 1
54 38 109 104 54
Eastern Palestine Israel Lebanon Syria Turkey Cyprus Average eastern
4 ND 31 0 3 0 3
24 ND 8 ND 12 ND 12
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ND 0 ND ND 1 ND 1
ND ND 98 0 ND 10 NC
27 ND 5a 7 4 6 4
55 NA 142 8 19 15 20
Northern Greece Albania Croatia Slovenia Italy France Spain Portugal Average northern Mediterranean
6 3 14 11 29 18 2 12 11 9
38 20 5 ND 8 ND 9 37 11 15
NA 0 NA NA 1 0 2 130 9 7
ND ND 1 4 11 ND 3 5 3 2
8 ND 1 5 3 ND ND 3 1 1
0 0 2 19 11 9b 2 19 6 5
52 23 23 40 62 27 17 206 41 39
Based on data collected within MEDFOREX project (Croitoru and Merlo, 2005). ND = no data available; NA = not applicable; NC = not calculated due to insufficient relevant information. Estimating the average values of individual benefits per group of countries (last column) was based on two considerations: (i) only the countries providing estimates were included in the weighted area average; (ii) the average obtained was considered representative for a country group only if the aggregated forest area of the countries providing the estimates was at least 50% of the total forest area of that country group. a Includes carob. Pine nuts and medicinal plants are not included due to a likely overestimation (see text). b Includes truffles, miscellaneous and other fruits.
772
EC O LO GIC A L E CO N O M ICS 6 3 ( 2 00 7 ) 7 6 8 –7 75
and the development of substitutes (e.g. plastic). The highest value of cork is found in Portugal (€130/ha of forests, or about €600/ha of cork oak area), the world's leading cork producer. Cork is the second most important NTFP in Tunisia, where it generates about €11/ha (∼€218/ha of cork oak area), much of which is received by the local communities. The role of cork in the other countries is much smaller.
4.3.
Fodder for grazing
In the past, grazing was a significant activity throughout the Mediterranean. In the last decades, however, the importance of grazing has diminished in many northern countries, especially in Western Europe. In contrast, grazing in forests remains significant in the southern and eastern Mediterranean. In fact, in this area, intensive grazing is common, causing long-term negative effects, such as soil erosion and decreasing fodder productivity. In many eastern countries, fodder productivity has declined to about 70–130 FU/ha in Lebanon and Turkey and as little as 30 FU/ha in Syria. Fodder production is comparatively higher in most northern countries, lying within 120–635 FU/ha. Using a shadow price of about €0.1–0.2/kg of barley, high estimated values of €30–80/ha are found in the southern countries. Relatively high estimates, of about €37/ha, are found also in the Portuguese montados and in Greece, where grazing remains a traditional rural activity. The importance of grazing in the other countries is substantially lower.
4.4.
Mushrooms
In the Western European countries, a large part of mushroom production is a by-product of recreational activities, enjoyed by visitors and society as a whole. Overall, the estimated mushroom benefits are highest in the northern countries, averaging about €3/ha. The value of mushrooms could not be estimated in most eastern countries. The lack of data does not imply the lack of mushrooms; rather, it shows that a large share of mushrooms is collected for free and sold on thin local markets, for which quantities and prices are not known.
Fig. 2 – Average NTFPs benefits in the Mediterranean region (2005 prices).
value of the maximum sustainable yield is used and extrapolated to the entire forest area. As such, this estimate likely substantially overestimates the real value of the current harvest of NTFPs. Similarly, the average estimate of medicinal plants in Lebanon (€135/ha) is likely to be overvalued. These estimates are therefore omitted when calculating the average value of NTFPs for the eastern country group and for the Mediterranean as a whole. In addition to the overestimation cases, there were instances when NTFPs could be only partially estimated (e.g. mushrooms in Tunisia) or not valued at all (e.g. firewood collected for free in most countries). The estimation gaps often led to high differences in average values of a particular benefit or of the total economic value for different countries. For example, the estimated total economic value of NTFPs in Lebanon (€142/ha) is much higher compared to that of other eastern countries (€8–55/ha). These differences most likely reduce the possibility of internal validation of available estimates; moreover, they tend to limit the degree of transferability of these estimates to other countries with similar forest contexts.
5. 4.5.
Honey
The highest value of honey, of about €98/ha, is found in Lebanon, as a result of the high local prices, and in Egypt, as an important honey producer worldwide. It should be noted however that these high values per hectare of forests are also a result of the small forest areas in Lebanon and Egypt. Honey is also relatively important in Slovenia, Cyprus and Greece (about €5–10/ha), but plays a negligible role in other countries.
4.6.
Other NTFPs
As with mushrooms, the data on the quantities and prices of other NTFPs are more readily available in northern countries. As a result, their average value is highest in these countries (€6/ha). Estimated values are much lower in the other country groups, mainly due to data scarcity. An extremely high value of about €430/ha was found in Lebanon for pine nuts only. As previously noted, in absence of more accurate data the gross
Discussion
If the estimated values of NTFPs are weighted according to each country's forest area, the average benefit of NTFPs in the Mediterranean is about €39/ha in 2005 (Fig. 2). The average estimate for southern countries (€54/ha) is considerably higher than that for northern (€41/ha) and eastern (€20/ha) countries. The high value for the south is mostly a result of grazing benefits, which alone account for about 65% of the per hectare NTFPs for this country group. This result is remarkable: despite the data limitations for several NTFPs (e.g. mushrooms, other NTFPs), the average estimated value of NTFPs in southern countries is higher than in the northern countries, where data for many other NTFPs are more readily available. Overall, grazing is the most notable benefit for all country groups. However, its importance relative to that of other NTFPs differs from one country group to another. In most southern and eastern countries, the estimated value of grazing stands out as the single most important benefit, while the estimates for the other products are considerably lower. In contrast, in northern countries, grazing and firewood are both relatively
EC O L O G IC A L E C O N O M IC S 6 3 ( 2 0 07 ) 76 8 –7 75
significant (27% of total NTFPs value each), closely followed by cork and other NTFPs. Many other NTFPs are found to be important, particularly in southern and eastern countries, where a large share of population depends on forests. Firewood collected for subsistence accounts for about 21% of the total value of NTFPs in Morocco, for example (based on Ellatifi, 2005). The estimated values of NTFPs in the Mediterranean are comparable to those obtained in other parts of the world. An early study (Peters et al., 1989) calculated the benefits of NTFPs harvested from a tropical forest in Peru to be worth as much as €480/ha/year2 (US$422/ha/year). Although many have argued that this particular estimate is an over-estimate (Godoy, 1992; Pendleton, 1992; Pinedo-Vásquez et al., 1992; Chomitz and Kumari, 1998), recent studies indicate that NTFPs can yield non-negligible returns. For example, studies undertaken in Latin America suggest annual ranges of values of €16–21/ha (US$18–24/ha) in the tropical forests of Honduras (Godoy et al., 2000) and of €19–39/ha (US$17–35/ha) in the rainforests of Brazil (Shone and Caviglia-Harris, 2006). This study's estimates for the Mediterranean countries fall within or close to these ranges. Other studies provide much wider ranges of estimates. A recent review of 61 cases of commercial NTFPs production in Africa, Asia and Latin America finds NTFPs benefits ranging between €0.3–135/ha/year (US$0.4–160.5/ha/year) (Belcher et al., 2005). It is commonly argued that these variations are influenced by various factors, such as the differences in the studies' objectives, methodology, assumptions, site biology, type of management and number of goods valued (Godoy and Lubowski, 1992; Lampietti and Dixon, 1995). The study from which these results are drawn (MEDFOREX) also estimated the value of other benefits provided by forests, such as hunting, recreation, watershed protection, carbon sequestration, and biodiversity conservation. The study then aggregated these values and estimated the Total Economic Value (TEV) of forests for each country, groups of countries and the Mediterranean region as a whole. The estimates thus obtained are taken as conservative, in that they do not capture specific categories of benefits (especially non-use values) for some countries. Bearing in mind these considerations, it is interesting to discuss the importance of the NTFPs in the estimated value of forests. At the Mediterranean level, NTFPs contribute 26% of the estimated forest TEV. The importance of NTFPs varies widely between country groups. NTFPs contribute about 73% to the estimated TEV of forests in southern countries, and some 38% in the eastern countries. As previously stated, this is mainly driven by the importance of grazing benefits. The apparent importance of NTFPs in this part of the Mediterranean is also partly due to the lack of estimates for other types of benefits, especially non-market benefits, however. In the northern countries, NTFPs represent only 20% of the forests' TEV; here, the importance of NTFPs is dwarfed by that of other forest benefits, such as recreation, watershed protection and timber. In per capita terms, NTFPs provide benefits of €9 annually to people living in the region. Average benefits are higher in 2 For comparability, the estimates obtained in these studies were updated to 2005 Euros. The original estimates expressed in dollars in the reference year are found between brackets.
773
Fig. 3 – Relationship between per capita forest area and per capita NTFPs benefits.
northern countries (€15/capita) compared to the southern (€5/capita) and eastern countries (€4/capita). It should be noted that per capita benefits depend not only on the benefits per hectare of forests, but also on the forest area and population size in each country group. Fig. 3 shows that countries with less than 0.1 ha/capita, generally from the southern and eastern groups, are associated with the lowest per capita NTFPs benefits. The per capita benefits tend to be substantially higher in the northern countries with more than 0.5 ha of forests/ capita. However, it should be recalled that part of this difference is due to a greater underestimation of benefits in the southern and eastern groups.
6.
Final considerations
This study attempted to estimate comprehensively the overall value of NTFPs and of individual categories of NTFPs at national and regional level in the Mediterranean region. The valuation effort aimed to follow a consistent methodology so as to provide comparable estimates within and across countries. It should be noted however that, as a first time effort to estimate a variety of NTFPs at such a large scale, this study was often subject to constraints. At the empirical level, data limitations prevented some countries from estimating particular categories of benefits. For example, free collection of firewood – legal and illegal – though notable in most southern and eastern countries, could be estimated only in a few. Even when estimates could be obtained, the approaches are not always fully comparable across countries. For example, some estimates are based on national level data, while others result from transferring a benefit obtained in small areas to larger areas where that particular benefit is produced. Realistically, these constraints are unavoidable in any valuation study that goes beyond the level of a single, specific plot, and particularly in studies focused on such a large scale. To a certain extent, they also tend to distort the overall results at national and regional levels. Thus, these estimates should not be taken as precise values for these areas. Rather, they have indicative significance, as orders of magnitude, and are meant to provoke further refinements. Despite these constraints, it is interesting to discuss these estimates in relation to the institutional and policy contexts
774
EC O LO GIC A L E CO N O M ICS 6 3 ( 2 00 7 ) 7 6 8 –7 75
in the region. In southern and eastern Mediterranean countries, most forests are publicly owned. Forest communities havesome free usage rights (e.g. collection of firewood, grazing, etc), but often have little incentive to preserve forests. In addition, a large share of the rural population is poor and depends on forest benefits as the major source of income. A recent study in Tunisia (Daly-Hassen and Ben Mansoura, 2005) shows that in Skhira area of Sejnane county, NTFPs – raising livestock, charcoal making, honey making, tobacco cropping – contributed as much as 73% of household income in 1999. The study reports that in several other areas, the poor are disproportionately dependent on NTFPs. In many cases, this results in excessive pressure on forests through over exploitation of NTFPs such as firewood and fodder, or in deforestation for conversion to alternative land uses (usually agriculture). In Morocco, for example, the rate of deforestation is said to be 31,000 ha/year, while illegal exploitation of firewood is twice the legal amount (Ellatifi, 2005). These practices are quite common in rural areas of the southern and eastern Mediterranean and can cause substantial damage such as erosion that affects the downstream communities. These situations call for finding tools to improve the development of these areas, both from the socio-economic and environmental standpoints. The estimates show that in many southern and eastern countries, the value of NTFPs far exceed that of timber. This situation, common in other parts of the world, has encouraged the belief that commercialization of NTFPs could be a way to both alleviate poverty and promote their sustainable use worldwide (Nepstad and Schwartzman, 1992; Panayotou and Ashton, 1992; Moussouris and Regato, 1999). It should be noted however that recent research has questioned the real potential of NTFPs commercialization to achieve both objectives. For example, Arnold and Ruiz Pérez (2001) argue that the initiatives of commercialization may result in the short-term over-use (if not depletion) of the NTFPs demanded in the market; besides, they often help the wealthier rather than the poorer who do not have the skills and technologies so as to benefit from market opportunities. These are only a few of a wide range of concerns that need to be looked at when searching for ways of improving both livelihood and conservation. Most research trying to find the right answer is inconclusive, reflecting the complexity of the issues at stake. In a recent overview, Sunderlin et al. (2005) concludes that the reconciliation between the two objectives should be supported by site-level research integrated with a good understanding of the society-wide effects. Though this discussion is mostly based on case studies in Latin America, there is plenty of scope to consider it also for the Mediterranean region.
Acknowledgements This paper is a result of MEDFOREX project, started by the European Forest Institute (EFI), Finland and Solsona Forest Technology Centre, Spain and carried out by Padua University CONTAGRAF Centre. The author acknowledges the outstanding contribution of Professor Maurizio Merlo, the main coordinator of the project until he sadly passed away in August 2003. Acknowledgements and special thanks are given also to the following scientists: Mohammed Ellatifi (Morocco);
Abdellah Nédjahi, Mohamed Zamoum (Algeria); Hamed DalyHassen, Ameur Ben Mansoura, (Tunisia); Roubina Ghattas, Nader Hrimat and Jad Isaac (Palestine); Avi Gafni (Israel); Elsa Sattout, Salma Talhouk, Nader Kabbani (Lebanon); Ibrahim Nahal, Salim Zahoueh (Syria); Mustafa Fehmi Turker, Mehmet Pak, Atakan Ozturk (Turkey); Department of Forests (Cyprus); Vassiliki Kazana, Angelos Kazaklis (Greece); Kostandin Dano (Albania); Rudolf Sabadi, Diana Vuletiæ, Joso Gracan (Croatia); Robert Mavsar, Lado Kutnar, Marko Kovac (Slovenia); Paola Gatto, Paolo Paiero (Italy); Claire Montagné, Jean-Luc Peyron, Alexandra Niedzwiedz and Odile Colnard (France); Pablo Campos Palacin, Enrique Sanjurjo, Alejandro Caparros (Spain); Américo Carvalho Mendes (Portugal). Special thanks are given also to Grant Milne, World Bank, for the constructive comments to this paper.
REFERENCES Adger, N., Brown, K., Cervigni, R., Moran, D., 1995. Total economic value of forests in Mexico. Ambio 24 (5), 286–296. Ambrose-Oji, B., 2003. The contribution of NTFPs to the livelihoods of the ‘forest poor’: evidence from the tropical forest zone of south-west Cameroon. International Forestry Review 5 (2), 106–117. Arnold, J.E.M., Ruiz Pérez, M., 2001. Can non-timber forest products match tropical forest conservation and development objectives? Ecological Economics 39, 437–447. Belcher, B.M., 2003. What isn't a NTFP? International Forestry Review 5 (2), 161–168. Belcher, B., Ruiz Pérez, M., Achdiawan, R., 2005. Global patterns and trends in the use and management of commercial NTFPs: implications for livelihoods and conservation. World Development 33 (9), 1435–1452. Bishop, J.T. (Ed.), 1999. Valuing Forests: A Review of Methods and Applications in Developing Countries. International Institute for Environment and Development, London. 48 pp. Braden, J.B., Kolstad, C.D. (Eds.), 1991. Measuring the Demand for Environmental Quality. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 17–28. Chomitz, K.M., Kumari, K., 1998. The domestic benefits of tropical forests: a critical review. The World Bank Research Observer 13 (1), 13–35. Croitoru, L., Merlo, M., 2005. Mediterranean Forest Values. In: Merlo, M., Croitoru, L. (Eds.), Valuing Mediterranean Forests: Towards Total Economic Value. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxon, pp. 105–122. Daly-Hassen, H., Ben Mansoura, A., 2005. Tunisia. In: Merlo, M., Croitoru, L. (Eds.), Valuing Mediterranean Forests: Towards Total Economic Value. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxon, pp. 105–122. Delang, C., 2006. Not just minor forest products: the economic rationale for the consumption of wild food plants by subsistence farmers, Ecological Economics 59 (1), 64–73. Dixon, J.A., Scura, L.F., Carpenter, L.A., Sherman, P.B., 1994. Economic Analysis of Environmental Impacts. Earthscan, London. Ellatifi, M., 2005. Morocco. In: Merlo, M., Croitoru, L. (Eds.), Valuing Mediterranean Forests: Towards Total Economic Value. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxon, pp. 69–87. Godoy, R., 1992. Some organizing principles in the valuation of tropical forests. Forest Ecology and Management 50, 174–175. Godoy, R., Lubowski, R., 1992. Guidelines for the economic valuation of non timber tropical forest products. Current Anthropology 33, 423–433. Godoy, R., Wilkie, D., Overman, H., Cubas, A., Cubas, G., Demmer, J., Mcsweeney, K., Brokaw, N., 2000. Valuation of consumption
EC O L O G IC A L E C O N O M IC S 6 3 ( 2 0 07 ) 76 8 –7 75
and sale of forest goods from a central American rain forest. Nature 406, 62–63. Gram, S., 2001. Economic valuation of special forest products: an assessment of methodological shortcomings. Ecological Economics 36, 109–117. Grimes, A., Loomis, S., Jahnige, P., Burnham, M., Onthank, K., Alarcón, R., Cuenca, W., Martinez, C., Neill, D., Balick, M., Bennett, B., Mendelsohn, R., 1994. Valuing the rain forest: the economic value of nontimber forest products in Ecuador. Ambio 23 (7), 405–410. Kumari, K., 1995. An Environmental and Economic Assessment of Forest Management Options: A Case Study in Malaysia. Environment Department Papers, Environmental Economics Series, Paper, vol. 26. World Bank, Washington DC, p. 49. Lampietti, J., Dixon, J., 1995. To See the Forest for the Trees: A Guide to Non-timber Forest Benefits. Environment Department Papers, Paper, vol. 13. World Bank, Washington DC, p. 32. Mahapatra, A.K., Tewari, D.D., 2005. Importance of non-timber forest products in the economic valuation of dry deciduous forests of India. Forest Policy and Economics 7, 455–467. Mendes, A., 2005. Portugal. In: Merlo, M., Croitoru, L. (Eds.), Valuing Mediterranean forests: Towards Total Economic Value. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, pp. 331–352. Moussouris, Y., Regato, P., 1999. Forest harvest: Mediterranean woodlands and the importance of non-timber forest products to forest conservation, Arborvitae October 1999, IUCN and WWF. Murthy, I.K., Bhat, P.R., Ravindrabath, N.H., Sukumar, R., 2005. Financial valuation of non-timber forest product flows in Uttara Kannada district, Western Ghats, Karnataka. Current Science 88 (10), 1573–1579. Nepstad, D.C., Schwartzman, S., 1992. Introduction: non-timber products from tropical forests: evaluation of a conservation and development strategy. In: Nepstad, D.C., Swartzman, S. (Eds.), Non-timber Products from Tropical Forests: Evaluation of a Conservation and Development Strategy. Advances in Economic Botany, vol. 9, pp. vii–xii. Neumann, R.P., Hirsch, E., 2000. Commercialisation of Non-timber Forest Products: Review and Analysis of the Research. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia, p. 176.
775
Panayotou, T., Ashton, P., 1992. Not by Timber Alone. Economics and Ecology for Sustaining Tropical Forests. Island Press, Washington, DC, p. 302. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 1995. The Economic Appraisal of Environmental Projects and Policies – A Practical Guide. OECD, Paris. Pendleton, L., 1992. Trouble in paradise: practical obstacles to non-timber forestry in Latin America. In: Plotkin, M., Famolare, L. (Eds.), Sustainable Harvest and Marketing of Rain Forest Products. Island Press, Washington D.C., USA, pp. 252–262. Peters, C.M., Gentry, A.H., Mendelssohn, R.O., 1989. Valuation of an Amazonian rainforest. Nature 339, 655–656. Pinedo-Vásquez, M., Zarin, D., Jipp, P., 1992. Economic returns from forest conversion in the Peruvian Amazon. Ecological Economics 6, 163–177. Raunikar, R., Buongiorno, J., 2006. Willingness to pay for forest amenities: the case of non-industrial owners in south central United States. Ecological Economics 56, 132–143. Shone, B.M., Caviglia-Harris, J.L., 2006. Quantifying and comparing the value of non-timber forest products in the Amazon, Ecological Economics 58, 249–267. Sunderlin, W.D., Angelsen, A., Belcher, B., Burgers, P., Nasi, R., Santoso, L., Wünder, S., 2005. Livelihoods, forests and conservation in developing countries: an overview. World Development 33 (9), 1383–1402. Türker, M., Pak, M., Öztürk, A., 2005. Turkey. In: Merlo, M., Croitoru, L. (Eds.), Valuing Mediterranean Forests: Towards Total Economic Value. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxon, pp. 195–211. Vantomme, P., 2003. Compiling statistics on non-wood forest products as policy and decision-making tools at national level. International Forestry Review 5 (2), 156–160. Winpenny, J.T., 1991. Values for the Environment. A Guide to Economic Appraisal. Overseas Development Institute. HMSO, London. World Bank, 2005. Islamic Republic of Iran. Cost Assessment of Environmental Degradation. Report N° 32043-IR, Rural Development, Water and Environment Department, Middle East and North Africa Region. Washington DC, p. 68 + Annexes.