Missing the forest for the trees: Ekiti State's quest for forestry revenue and its impact on forest managers

IF 4 2区 农林科学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Giovanni Occhiali , Michael Falade
{"title":"Missing the forest for the trees: Ekiti State's quest for forestry revenue and its impact on forest managers","authors":"Giovanni Occhiali ,&nbsp;Michael Falade","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103451","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Many countries' forests are over-exploited and mismanaged, including through ineffective taxation. This is the case across Nigeria, where forest management has been decentralised to individual states. In this paper we assess the forestry tax regime in Ekiti State, where forests represent more than 50 % of land area and forest revenue has been historically relevant. We aim to complement a literature on tropical forest management often based on big-picture theories with a close empirical examination of the experiences of forest managers. Based on 16 interviews with public and private stakeholders, as well as data from the Forestry Commission, our analysis suggests that the Commission excessive focus on forests' revenue-generating capacity is contributing to their depletion, which remains driven by economic phenomena. The conceptualisation of the Forestry Commission as a revenue-raising agency rather than a management one, non-transparent tax rates, and a view of the industry potential disconnected from reality, are perversely associated to decreasing forestry revenue. While there is potential to reform both the structure of forestry taxes and their method of administration, evidence suggests that priority should be given to enforcing lower levels of forest exploitation and to allowing government reserves to regrow. This will require substantial sensitisation and engagement with actors in the sector, as well as increasing the monitoring capacity of the Forestry Commission, which does not currently have enough staff to guarantee the enforcement of existing legislation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":"172 ","pages":"Article 103451"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Policy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934125000309","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many countries' forests are over-exploited and mismanaged, including through ineffective taxation. This is the case across Nigeria, where forest management has been decentralised to individual states. In this paper we assess the forestry tax regime in Ekiti State, where forests represent more than 50 % of land area and forest revenue has been historically relevant. We aim to complement a literature on tropical forest management often based on big-picture theories with a close empirical examination of the experiences of forest managers. Based on 16 interviews with public and private stakeholders, as well as data from the Forestry Commission, our analysis suggests that the Commission excessive focus on forests' revenue-generating capacity is contributing to their depletion, which remains driven by economic phenomena. The conceptualisation of the Forestry Commission as a revenue-raising agency rather than a management one, non-transparent tax rates, and a view of the industry potential disconnected from reality, are perversely associated to decreasing forestry revenue. While there is potential to reform both the structure of forestry taxes and their method of administration, evidence suggests that priority should be given to enforcing lower levels of forest exploitation and to allowing government reserves to regrow. This will require substantial sensitisation and engagement with actors in the sector, as well as increasing the monitoring capacity of the Forestry Commission, which does not currently have enough staff to guarantee the enforcement of existing legislation.
只见树木不见森林:埃基蒂州对林业收入的追求及其对森林管理者的影响
许多国家的森林被过度开发和管理不善,包括无效的税收。尼日利亚的情况就是如此,那里的森林管理已经分散到各个州。在本文中,我们评估了埃基蒂州的林业税收制度,在该州,森林占土地面积的50%以上,森林收入具有历史意义。我们的目标是补充关于热带森林管理的文献,这些文献通常基于宏观理论,并对森林管理者的经验进行密切的实证研究。基于对16个公共和私人利益攸关方的访谈,以及林业委员会的数据,我们的分析表明,委员会过度关注森林的创收能力,导致森林的枯竭,这仍然是由经济现象驱动的。将林业委员会概念化为一个增加收入的机构而不是一个管理机构、不透明的税率以及对工业潜力的看法与现实脱节,这些都与林业收入的减少有着不可避免的联系。虽然有可能改革林业税的结构及其管理方法,但有证据表明,应优先执行较低水平的森林开采,并允许政府储备重新生长。这将需要对该部门的行为者进行充分的宣传和参与,以及提高林业委员会的监测能力,该委员会目前没有足够的工作人员来保证现有立法的执行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Forest Policy and Economics
Forest Policy and Economics 农林科学-林学
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
7.50%
发文量
148
审稿时长
21.9 weeks
期刊介绍: Forest Policy and Economics is a leading scientific journal that publishes peer-reviewed policy and economics research relating to forests, forested landscapes, forest-related industries, and other forest-relevant land uses. It also welcomes contributions from other social sciences and humanities perspectives that make clear theoretical, conceptual and methodological contributions to the existing state-of-the-art literature on forests and related land use systems. These disciplines include, but are not limited to, sociology, anthropology, human geography, history, jurisprudence, planning, development studies, and psychology research on forests. Forest Policy and Economics is global in scope and publishes multiple article types of high scientific standard. Acceptance for publication is subject to a double-blind peer-review process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信