Benefit-Cost Analysis of With and Without Certificate of Verification Requirement for Harvesting in Private Bamboo Plantations in the Philippines
Vivian C. Daracan1*, Analyn L. Codilan2, Edgar E. Devera1, Priscila C. Dolom3,
Aresna B. Palacpac3, Hanna Leen L. Capinpin3, Noel L. Tolentino3, Ma. Magdalena B. Villanueva3,
Sofronio C. Camacho3, Lorie M. Alborida3, and Ramon A. Razal1
1Department of Forest Products and Paper Science
2Institute of Renewable Natural Resources
3Forestry Development Center
College of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of the Philippines Los Baños
College, Laguna 4031 Philippines
To protect the country’s forestlands, the Philippine government requires owners of private bamboo plantations to obtain a certificate of verification (CoV) from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) prior to harvesting the bamboo poles. However, this requirement is seen as a disincentive to planting bamboo and as a hindrance to the bamboo industry’s development. The present study investigated whether the economic benefits of removing the CoV would exceed the costs attendant to the absence of such a requirement in various regions where the DENR implements the CoV policy. Using region-specific pricing of labor and bamboo poles, the foreseen benefits of removing the CoV include higher income, avoided costs (on the part of landowners) like application and inspection costs, and other economic advantages associated with the increase in bamboo plantation areas. Computed as costs were the presumed higher forest protection cost and added expenditures that result from increased bamboo plantation areas supposedly encouraged by a less restrictive policy. The findings show that, for all the regions, the stream of incremental benefits (IBs) in the absence of CoV far exceeds the costs. The calculated benefit-cost ratios over a fifty-year study period at four discount rates ( 6%, 8%, 10%, and 12%) showed that the benefits of removing CoV consistently outweighed the costs. Hence, we prescribe that the CoV should no longer be made a requirement for harvesting bamboo from private lands.
Bamboo as an Economic Resource
Bamboo is an economically important plant – especially for the poor, marginalized sectors of society in most of the developing, tropical countries. The statement attributed to Forester S. King by J. Oliver (1956), author of ‘Bamboo as an Economic Resource in Southern Asia, that “no plant is known in the tropical zone which could supply to man so many technical advantages as the bamboo – without the bamboo, the Indian would be poor, very poor indeed” aptly describes the plant’s significance among the poor. . . . read more
BAJA-LAPIS AC, PALIJON AM, TESORO FO, VIRTUCIO FD. 2016. Bamboo: The Grass Hope. Philippine Bamboo Foundation, Inc.
BEGUM RA, SIWAR C, PEREIRA JJ, JAAFAR AH. 2006. A benefit-cost analysis on the economic feasibility of construction waste minimisation. Resources Conservation and Recycling 48(1): 86–98.
CAASI-LIT MT, MABESA LB, CANDELARIA RB. 2010. Bamboo Shoot Resources of the Philippines: I. Edible Bamboo and the Current Status of the Local Bamboo Shoot Industry. Philippine Journal of Crop Science 35(2): 54–68.
CHEN X, ZHANG X, ZHANG Y, BOOTH T, HE X. 2009. Changes of carbon stocks in bamboo stands in China during 100 years. Forest Ecology and Management 258(7): 1489–1496.
[DENR] Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 1987. Regulations Governing the Measurement, Assessment and Payment of Forest Charges on Timber and Other Forest Products [DAO No. 80]. Quezon City, Philippines.
[DENR] Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 1993. Revised Rules and Regulations Governing the Transport/Shipment of Logs, Lumber, Plywood, Veneer, NTFPs and other Forest-Based Products/Commodities [DAO No. 59]. Quezon City, Philippines.
[DTI] Department of Trade and Industry. 2016. The Philippine Bamboo Industry Development Road Map. Manila, Philippines.
ESCOBEDO FJ, WAGNER JE, NOWAK DJ, DE LA MAZA CL, RODRIGUEZ M, CRANE DE. 2008. Analyzing the cost effectiveness of Santiago, Chile's policy of using urban forests to improve air quality. Journal of Environmental Management 86(1): 148–157.
[ERDB] Ecosystem Research and Development Bureau. 2013. Costs and returns of kawayan tinik plantation for bamboo pole and shoot production [terminal report]. Los Baños, Philippines.
FARROW S, TOMAN M. 1998. Using Environmental Benefit-Cost Analysis to Improve Government Performance. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
FEUILLETTE S, LEVREL H, BOEUF B, BLANQUART S, GORIN O, MONACO G, PENNISON B, ROBICHON S. 2016. The use of cost-benefit analysis in environmental policies: Some issues raised by the Water Framework Directive implementation in France. Environmental Science and Policy 57: 79–85.
GIORDANO CV, SANCHEZ RA, AUSTIN AT. 2009. Gregarious bamboo flowering opens a window of opportunity for regeneration in a temperate forest in Patagonia. New Phytologist 181(4): 880–889.
[INBAR] International Network for Bamboo and Rattan. 2014. Retrieved from http://www.inbar.int on 24 Feb 2019.
JAKOB A, CRAIG JL, FISHER G. 2006. Transport Cost Analysis: A Case Study of the Total Costs of Private and Public Transport in Auckland. Environmental Science and Policy 9(1): 55–66.
KASSAHUN T. 2015. Review Of Bamboo Value Chain in Ethiopia. International Journal of African Society Culture and Traditions 2(3): 52–67.
LANTING MV Jr. et al. 2013. Survey of Bamboo Stands and Establishment of a National Database of Economically Important Bamboo Species in the Philippines. Los Baños, Philippines: Ecosystems and Development Bureau.
LING M, CHRISTENSEN M, DONNISON A, BELMONTE KD, BROWN C. 2016. Scoping Study to Inform the Global Assessment of Bamboo and Rattan (GABAR). Cambridge, UK: UN Environment World Conservation Monitoring Centre.
MARCELO E. 2018 Aug 16. Reforestation, Anti-illegal logging DENR Priorities in 2019. The Philippine Star. B6p. Retrieved from https://www.pressreader.com/philippines/the-philippine-star/
MAHAPATRA AK, SHACKLETON CM. 2011. Has deregulation of non-timber forest product controls and marketing in Orissa state (India) affected local patterns of use and marketing. Forest Policy and Economics 13(8): 622–629.
MIDMORE DJ. 2009. Silvicultural management of bamboo in the Philippines and Australia for shoots and timber. Proceedings of a workshop held in Los Baños, Philippines, 2006 Nov 22–23. Canberra, Australia: Australian Centre for Internationl Agricultural Research (ACIAR). 139p.
MUNICH D, PSACHAROPOULOS G. 2014. Mechanisms and methods for cost-benefit/cost-effectiveness analysis of specific education programmes. Stockholm: European Expert Network in Economics of Education.
NATH AJ, LAL R, DAS AK. 2015. Managing woody biomass for carbon farming and carbon trading. Global Ecology and Conservation 3: 654–663.
OLIVER J. 1956. Bamboo as an economic resource in Southern Asia. Geography 41(1): 49–56.
PADILLA JE, JANSSEN R. 1996. Extended Benefit-Cost Analysis of Management Alternatives: Pagbilao Mangrove Forest. Journal of Philippine Development XXIII(2): 339–363.
PATRICIO JHP, DUMAGO SWL. 2014. Comparing Aboveground Carbon Sequestration of Three Economically Important Bamboo Species Grown in Bukidnon, Philippines. Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies 3(1): 1–15.
RAZAL RA, DOLOM PC, VILLANUEVA MMB, CAMACHO SC, PERALTA EO. 2007. Charting the Direction of Non-TImber Forest Products (NTFP) Research and Development in the Philippines: The Role of Forest Policies and Regulations. Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFP) Policy Forum entitled 'When "Non" Means Everything'; Quezon City, Philippines. p. 57–76.
[RA 7161] Republic Act No. 7161. 1991. An Act Incorporating Certain Sections of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1977, as Amended, to Presidential Decree No. 705, as Amended, Otherwise Known as the "Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines", and Providing Amendments Thereto by Increasing the Forest Charges on Timber and Other Forest Products.
SCURLOCK JMO, DAYTON DC, HAMES B. 2000. Bamboo: An overlooked biomass resource? Biomass and Bioenergy 19: 229–244.
[WBE] World Bank and Ecofys. 2018. State and Trends of Carbon pricing 2018 (May). Washington, DC: World Bank.