A Review and Appraisal of Ireland’s Forestry Development Strategy

1. A Review and Appraisal of Ireland’s Forestry Development Strategy by Peter Bacon and Associates Sharon Finegan MSc Economic Policy Studies 2nd December 2011

2. Review and Analysis Structure 2 parts: • Ex-post evaluation of the 1996 Strategic Plan for development of the Forestry Sector “Growing for the Future”. • Forward looking piece which identifies the reforms required to achieve further progress.

3. Report covers 4 broad themes: • Review of the existing strategy including a VFM review • Examines some of the developments in the sector including non-timber benefits • Identifies the impact of reform of the CAP • Examines funding methods and structures

4. Ex-ante evaluation: what did the original strategy aim to achieve? • Sets targets for increased planting • Increased yields • Greater mix of species • New focus on environmental considerations • Improving the attractiveness of forestry to farmers • Improving some of the non-timer benefits to forestry • Range of other issues including improved research, planning, education and training etc

5. Analysis of outcomes from 1996 Strategy • Rate of afforestation has fallen short of the target • 14,000 ha/yr compared with a target of 20,000 ha/yr • Other shortcomings: • Species mix not achieved (impacting on commercial market viability) • Poor forest management • Concludes that Govt investment in forestry should continue and is essential for the viability of the sector

6. 1996 Strategy- further comments The report considers some of the reasons why the target was not reached and concludes that: “failure to adequately recognise and quantify the returns from non-timber benefits means that policy has not adequately supported the protection of the potential environmental and recreational benefits of forestry” (Page 120)

7. Non-timber benefits of forestryChapter 4 • Recreation and Leisure • Carbon Sequestration and Storage • Biodiversity • Landscape • Water supply and quality • Health * Will focus on the work done on the first three.

8. Non-timber benefits of forestry 1. Recreation and Leisure • Deficiencies in the Irish data available • Baseline data from UK model used- Willingness to Pay (WTP)- (use of UK data in Irish context must be done with caution) • Estimate a WTP of €3.34 pp/ year for forests for recreation • With approx 11 million visitors, this equates to €37.6 million per annum • Entrance fee causes considerable behaviour changes, therefore forests must be available at low private cost

9. Non-timber benefits of forestry 2. Carbon Sequestration and Storage • Approach outlined assumes that each tonne sequestered by forests will be a saving to the state. • Sequestration, in theory, negates the need to purchase credits, by ‘sinking the carbon in the atmosphere’. • Report estimates that sequestration will be worth between €38.8 and €51.7 million per annum • However, no formal method of monetisation has emerged. • As such, the savings being derived are theoretical, are based on a functioning accountancy system. • The price of carbon is also crucial here.

10. Non-timber benefits of forestry 3. Biodiversity • Methodology constructed using UK base-line data with WTP figures and applying them in Ireland. • WTP question concerned with increasing the area of forest managed under four different standards • Highest WTP was when forests were at their desired level of biodiversity- between 51.7 and 56.4 pence per year • Analysis is dependent on what the alternative use of the land is- Interaction with REPS

11. Non-timber benefits of forestry Summary • Report estimates a total value for non-timber goods in the forestry sector of €88.4 million per annum. • Given the nature of these NTBs, it is argued that they present a compelling case for Govt intervention: non-excludable, non- rivalrous, and have a range of positive externalities. • Authors recommend that the NTBs of forestry are highlighted and that additional data should be made available to support this.

12. Some Issues with the methodology • In quantifying the non-timber benefits of forests, the analysis is carried out based on existing forests only • Cost associated with new forests- not quantified- yet this is where it is likely to be applied for decision making • Seems unlikely that all new forests would have all of these positive attributes- study could have usefully suggested how to include/ exclude based on individual circumstances • Insufficient detail on potential costs for Non-timber activities

13. Questions?Comments?