Linking national wood consumption with global biodiversity and ecosystem service losses

Science of the Total Environment

Volumn 586, Issue , 2017, Pages 985-994

  Chaudhary, Abhishek ^a   Carrasco, L Roman ^b   Kastner, Thomas ^c,d  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

^c BIODIVERSITY AND CLIMATE RESEARCH CENTRE BIK F   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF KLAGENFURT   (Austria)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Ecosystem; Forestry; Global trade; Land use; Sustainability

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; FORESTRY; INTERNATIONAL TRADE; LAND USE; LIFE CYCLE; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; TIMBER; WOOD PRODUCTS;

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINTS; FINANCIAL COMPENSATION; GLOBAL TRADE; LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT (LCA); NATIONAL STRATEGIES; SPECIES-AREA RELATIONSHIP; SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION;

ECOSYSTEMS;

BIODIVERSITY; ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; FORESTRY; INTERNATIONAL TRADE; LAND USE; SUSTAINABILITY; WOOD;

ARTICLE; BIODIVERSITY; ECONOMIC RECESSION; ECOSYSTEM; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY; FOREST; FORESTRY; LAND USE; LOW INCOME COUNTRY; NONHUMAN; SPECIES EXTINCTION; TROPICS; WOOD; ANIMAL; BOLIVIA; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; GAMBIA; NICARAGUA; PHILIPPINES; SRI LANKA;

AMPHIBIA; AVES; MAMMALIA; REPTILIA; VERTEBRATA;

ANIMALS; BIODIVERSITY; BOLIVIA; COMMERCE; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; FORESTS; GAMBIA; NICARAGUA; PHILIPPINES; SRI LANKA; WOOD;

EID: 85013041480     PISSN: 00489697     EISSN: 18791026     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.02.078     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Alexandratos, N., Bruinsma, J., World Agriculture Towards 2030/2050: The 2012 Revision. 2012, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.
2. Barlow, J., Gardner, T.A., Araujo, I.S., Ávila-Pires, T.C., Bonaldo, A.B., Costa, J.E., Esposito, M.C., Ferreira, L.V., Hawes, J., Hernandez, M.I., Hoogmoed, M.S., Quantifying the biodiversity value of tropical primary, secondary, and plantation forests. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 104:47 (2007), 18555–18560.
3. Bartholomé, E., Belward, A., GLC2000: a new approach to global land cover mapping from Earth observation data. Int. J. Remote Sens. 26 (2005), 1959–1977.
4. Cai, Z., Aguilar, F.X., Meta-analysis of consumer's willingness-to-pay premiums for certified wood products. J. For. Econ. 19:1 (2013), 15–31.
5. CBD, UN Convention on Biological Diversity: Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Available online https://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/, 2015 (accessed on 26 April 2016).
6. Chang, J., Symes, W.S., Lim, F., Carrasco, L.R., International trade causes large net economic losses in tropical countries via the destruction of ecosystem services. Ambio 45:4 (2016), 387–397.
7. Chaudhary, A., Verones, F., de Baan, L., Hellweg, S., Quantifying land use impacts on biodiversity: combining species–area models and vulnerability indicators. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49:16 (2015), 9987–9995.
8. Chaudhary, A., Burivalova, Z., Koh, L.P., Hellweg, S., Impact of forest management on species richness: global meta-analysis and economic trade-offs. Sci. Rep., 6, 2016, 23954.
9. Chaudhary, A., Kastner, T., Land use biodiversity impacts embodied in international food trade. Glob. Environ. Chang. 38 (2016), 195–204.
10. de Groot, R., Brander, L., van der Ploeg, S., Costanza, R., Bernard, F., Braat, L., Christie, M., Crossman, N., Ghermandi, A., Hein, L., Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units. Ecosyst. Serv. 1 (2012), 50–61.
11. Dirzo, R., Young, H.S., Galetti, M., Ceballos, G., Isaac, N.J., Collen, B., Defaunation in the Anthropocene. Science 345:6195 (2014), 401–406.
12. Drakare, S., Lennon, J.J., Hillebrand, H., The imprint of the geographical, evolutionary and ecological context on species–area relationships. Ecol. Lett. 9:2 (2006), 215–227.
13. Ellis, E., Ramankutty, N., Putting people in the map: anthropogenic biomes of the world. Front. Ecol. Environ. 6:8 (2008), 439–447.
14. FAO, FAOSTAT Forestry Database. 2013, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome Available at http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/FT.
15. FAOSTAT, Agriculture, Fisheries, Forestry, Nutrition. 2015, Statistics Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome Available at http://faostat3.fao.org/home/E.
16. Finer, M., Jenkins, C.N., Sky, M.A.B., Pine, J., Logging concessions enable illegal logging crisis in the Peruvian Amazon. Sci. Rep., 4, 2014, 4719.
17. FRA, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015: Main Report, 2015, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
18. Gibbs, H.K., Rausch, L., Munger, J., Schelly, I., Morton, D.C., Noojipady, P., Soares-Filho, B., Barreto, P., Micol, L., Walker, N.F., Brazil's soy moratorium. Science 347:6220 (2015), 377–378.
19. Gibbs, H.K., Munger, J., L'Roe, J., Barreto, P., Pereira, R., Christie, M., Amaral, T., Walker, N.F., Did ranchers and slaughterhouses respond to zero-deforestation agreements in the Brazilian Amazon?. Conserv. Lett. 9:1 (2015), 32–34.
20. Godar, J.U., Persson, M.E., Tizado, J., Meyfroidt, P., Towards more accurate and policy relevant footprint analyses: tracing fine-scale socio-environmental impacts of production to consumption. Ecol. Econ. 112 (2015), 25–35.
21. IPCC, 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. 2006, IGES, Japan.
22. Hubacek, K., Feng, K., Comparing apples and oranges: some confusion about using and interpreting physical trade matrices versus multi-regional input–output analysis. Land Use Policy 50 (2016), 194–201.
23. IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2, 2011 http://www.iucnredlist.org.
24. Kastner, T., Erb, K.H., Nonhebel, S., International wood trade and forest change: a global analysis. Glob. Environ. Chang. 21:3 (2011), 947–956.
25. Kastner, T., Kastner, M., Nonhebel, S., Tracing distant environmental impacts of agricultural products from a consumer perspective. Ecol. Econ. 70:6 (2011), 1032–1040.
26. Keenan, R.J., Reams, G.A., Achard, F., de Freitas, J.V., Grainger, A., Lindquist, E., Dynamics of global forest area: results from the FAO global forest resources assessment 2015. For. Ecol. Manag. 352 (2015), 9–20.
27. Kissinger, M., Rees, W.E., Importing terrestrial biocapacity: the US case and global implications. Land Use Policy 27:2 (2010), 589–599.
28. Kissinger, G., Herold, M., Drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. A Synthesis Report for REDD + Policymakers, 2012.
29. Kitzes, J., Berlow, E., Conlisk, E., Erb, K., Iha, K., Martinez, N., Newman, E.A., Plutzar, C., Smith, A.B., Harte, J., Consumption-based conservation targeting: linking biodiversity loss to upstream demand through a global wildlife footprint. Conserv. Lett., 2016.
30. Kleinschmit, D., Mansourian, S., Wildburger, C., Purret, A., Illegal logging and related timber trade – dimensions, drivers, impacts and responses. A Global Scientific Rapid Response Assessment Report IUFRO World Series Volume 35. Vienna, 2016.
31. Kshatriya, M., Sills, E.O., Lin, L., Global Database of REDD + and Other Forest Carbon Projects. Accessed on 12th August 2016 at: http://www.forestsclimatechange.org/redd-map/, 2013.
32. Lambin, E.F., Meyfroidt, P., Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 108 (2011), 3465–3472.
33. Lenzen, M., Moran, D., Kanemoto, K., Foran, B., Lobefaro, L., Geschke, A., International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations. Nature 486:7401 (2012), 109–112.
34. Leontief, W.W., Input–Output Economics. 1986, Oxford University Press, USA, New York.
35. Mace, G.M., Gittleman, J.L., Purvis, A., Preserving the tree of life. Science 300:5626 (2003), 1707–1709.
36. Meyfroidt, P., Lambin, E.F., Forest transition in Vietnam and displacement of deforestation abroad. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 106:38 (2009), 16139–16144.
37. Meyfroidt, P., Rudel, T.K., Lambin, E.F., Forest transitions, trade, and the global displacement of land use. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 107:49 (2010), 20917–20922.
38. Mills Busa, J.H., Deforestation beyond borders: addressing the disparity between production and consumption of global resources. Conserv. Lett. 6:3 (2013), 192–199.
39. Moran, D.D., Wackernagel, M.C., Kitzes, J.A., Heumann, B.W., Phan, D., Goldfinger, S.H., Trading spaces: calculating embodied ecological footprints in international trade using a product land use matrix (PLUM). Ecol. Econ. 68:7 (2009), 1938–1951.
40. Moran, D., Petersone, M., Verones, F., On the suitability of input–output analysis for calculating product-specific biodiversity footprints. Ecol. Econ. 60 (2016), 192–201.
41. Moran, D., Kanemoto, K., Identifying species threat hotspots from global supply chains. Nat. Ecol. Evol., 1, 2017, 0023.
42. Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., Da Fonseca, G.A., Kent, J., Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:6772 (2000), 853–858.
43. Nishijima, S., Furukawa, T., Kadoya, T., Ishihama, F., Kastner, T., Matsuda, H., Kaneko, N., Evaluating the impacts of wood production and trade on bird extinction risks. Ecol. Indic. 71 (2016), 368–376.
44. Olson, D., Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E., Burgess, N., Powell, G., Underwood, E., DAmico, J., Itoua, I., Strand, H., Morrison, J., Loucks, C., Allnutt, T., Ricketts, T., Kura, Y., Lamoreux, J., Wettengel, W., Hedao, P., Kassem, K., Terrestrial ecoregions of the worlds: a new map of life on Earth. Bioscience 51:11 (2001), 933–938.
45. Pereira, H.M., Ziv, G., Miranda, M., Countryside species-area relationship as a valid alternative to the matrix-calibrated species area model. Conserv. Biol. 28:3 (2014), 874–876.
46. Ramankutty, N., Foley, J.A., Estimating historical changes in global land cover: croplands from 1700 to 1992. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 13 (1999), 997–1027.
47. Shandra, J.M., Leckband, C., McKinney, L.A., London, B., Ecologically unequal exchange, world polity, and biodiversity loss a cross-national analysis of threatened mammals. Int. J. Comp. Sociol. 50:3–4 (2009), 285–310.
48. Tittensor, D.P., Walpole, M., Hill, S.L., Boyce, D.G., Britten, G.L., Burgess, N.D., Visconti, P., A mid-term analysis of progress toward international biodiversity targets. Science 346:6206 (2014), 241–244.
49. Verones, F., Moran, D., Stadler, K., Kanemoto, K., Wood, R., Resource footprints and their ecosystem consequences. Sci. Rep., 7, 2017.
50. Wearn, O.R., Reuman, D.C., Ewers, R.M., Extinction debt and windows of conservation opportunity in the Brazilian Amazon. Science 337:6091 (2012), 228–232.
51. Weinzettel, J., Hertwich, E.G., Peters, G.P., Steen-Olsen, K., Galli, A., Affluence drives the global displacement of land use. Glob. Environ. Chang. 23 (2013), 433–438.
52. Wilber, M.Q., Kitzes, J., Harte, J., Scale collapse and the emergence of the power law species–area relationship. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 24:8 (2015), 883–895.
53. WildFinder, Online database of species distributions, version January 06. 2006, World Wildlife Fund http://www.worldwildlife.org/WildFinder (accessed 27.08.16.).
54. Williamson, M., Gaston, K.J., Lonsdale, W.M., The species-area relationship does not have an asymptote!. J. Biogeogr. 28:7 (2001), 827–830.
55. Yu, Y., Feng, K., Hubacek, K., Tele-connecting local consumption to global land use. Glob. Environ. Chang. 23:5 (2013), 1178–1186.