Economic and environmental impacts of conventional and reduced-impact logging in Tropical South America: a comparative review

Indicators of environmental impact and financial performance are compared for case studies of tropical forest logging from the Brazilian Amazon, Guyana, and Ecuador. Each case study presents parameters obtained from monitoring initial harvest entries into primary forests for planned, reduced-impact logging (RIL) and unplanned, conventional logging (CL) operations. Differences in cost definitions and data collection protocols complicate the comparative analysis, and suggest that caution is necessary in interpreting results. Given this caveat, it appears that RIL can generate competitive or superior profits relative to CL if the financial costs of wood wasted in the harvesting operation are fully accounted for. Increased operational efficiency is an important benefit of RIL, one that largely determines its cost-effectiveness relative to conventional practices. Uncertainties concerning the marginal benefits of RIL relative to familiar, profitable conventional practices pose an obstacle to broader adoption. Moreover, CL firms face few incentives to alter their operations unless they face dramatic changes in market signals. Adoption of RIL techniques as part of a long-term forest management regime faces additional challenges related to the opportunity cost of silvicultural prescriptions and timber set-asides to maintain productivity and ecosystem integrity.