Wrong and lacking understanding by Grassi et al. mislead their argumentation about forest reference levels in the EU

In Grassi et al. (2018) it is argued that wrong premises result in misleading conclusions in Kallio et al. (2018) about the Forest Reference Level (FRL) approach included in the EU LULUCF Regulations. Discussing the arguments presented by Grassi et al., we find that they fail on all major points, an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inForest policy and economics
Main Authors Solberg, Birger, Kallio, Maarit I, Käär, Liisa, Päivinen, Risto
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published 17.04.2019
Subjects
climate
employment
European Union
forest industries
forest products
forest resources
forests
issues and policy
trade
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1389-9341
DOI10.1016/j.forpol.2019.04.009

Cover

More Information
Summary:In Grassi et al. (2018) it is argued that wrong premises result in misleading conclusions in Kallio et al. (2018) about the Forest Reference Level (FRL) approach included in the EU LULUCF Regulations. Discussing the arguments presented by Grassi et al., we find that they fail on all major points, and, in addition, reveal a surprising lack of understanding about how FRLs will function in the global market-driven forest sector economy. The results shown in Kallio et al. (2018) are still valid, suggesting that due to the globally growing demand for forest products and available forest resources outside the EEA (i.e. in RoW), the trade leakages of harvests, forest industry productions, and consequently also employment, from EEA to RoW could be considerable. Therefore, any climate mitigation benefits of the FRL policy unilaterally implemented by the EU in the form of increased forest sinks within the EEA, would be much reduced.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
content type line 23
ObjectType-Feature-2
ISSN:1389-9341
DOI:10.1016/j.forpol.2019.04.009