STATE OF THE WORLDS FORESTS 2003 approach is to pay people directly for the making)and pulp and paper production, but as ecological services they protect, a tool that is excluding employees in government forest under rapid development. and people involved in the transpo of forest pro Latin America, to compensate upstream forest not employed by forest industry firms. A study owners for the protection of hydrological of six developing countries found that forest services. Examples include payments by based enterprises accounted for 13 to 35 percent hydroelectric plants, drinking-water consumers of all small-scale rural enterprise employment (FAO,1987) Costa Rica and Ecuador(Pagiola, 2001 )and tax benefits to forest-rich municipalities in Brazil Local multiplier effects. It is possible that forestry Grieg-Gran, 2000). The welfare implications of activities alleviate poverty through local these schemes are not yet known. Landell-Mills multiplier effects. For example, opening a forest and Porras(2002)state that the key hurdles concession and bringing in a logging workforce facing the poor in watershed protection schemes creates a demand for food, goods and services, as are their lack of bargaining power and their lack well as employment opportunities. Likewise, of to markets of a logging road While tourism companies benefit transport of logs, but also opens up access to disproportionately from forest-based tourism markets for other goods, potentially increasing schemes. there is evidence that even small local incomes. It can also give local people access absolute cash transfers per tourist from nature- to outside health and schooling services based tourism can benefit local people However, negative effects must also be significantly. Examples are the CAmPFIRE project considered, among which are reduced NWFP in Zimbabwe(Zimbabwe Trust, Department of production from logged-over forests, conflicts National Parks and Wildlife Management, and with logging companies and disruptions resulting CAMPFIRE Association, 1994), the Annapurna from the collapse of the economic boom after the Conservation Area Project in Nepal(Gurung and logging has ended Coursey, 1994), international ecotourism operations in Ecuador(Wunder, 1999)and Trickle-down effects. Not enough is known abou nationally controlled tourism in forest areas in the extent to which forestry contributes to poverty Brazil(Wunder, 2000) reduction through its impact on overall economic growth, or about whether cheaper forest products Employment and indirect benefits from increased market supplies improve the ery little is known about alleviating poverty economic status of urban consumers the through formal or informal forest sector contribution of the forest sector to gross domestic employment and through indirect benefits, such product(GDP)tends to be a small fraction in as local multiplier effects or trickle-down effects. most developing countries. It should be noted, As limited empirical evidence is available, the however, that the value-added figure for the present section lists only basic information about forest sector significantly underestimates the total these aspects inasmuch as a large share of forest products are not registered because they are used fo Employment In the late 1990s, there were subsistence and trade on local markets. moreover roughly 17.4 million employees in the formal low GDP contributions can also reflect the simple forest sector worldwide, and roughly 47 million fact that in many cases forest products are not if informal employment was also included(ILO, scarce and are therefore cheap(Simpson, 1999) 2001). Forest sector employment is understood Furthermore, although timber wealth often here as encompassing forestry (including represents only a small share of GDP, it tends to logging), wood industries (including furniture be important for economic development, as th2003 FORESTS S’WORLD THE OF STATE 66 the for directly people pay to is approach is that tool a, protect they services ecological .development rapid under in mainly, schemes payment been have There forest upstream compensate to, America Latin hydrological of protection the for owners by payments include Examples. services consumers water-drinking, plants hydroelectric ,Colombia in systems irrigation of users and tax and) 2001, Pagiola (Ecuador and Rica Costa Brazil in municipalities rich-forest to benefits of implications welfare The). 2000, Gran-Grieg( Mills-Landell. known yet not are schemes these hurdles key the that state) 2002 (Porras and schemes protection watershed in poor the facing lack their and power bargaining of lack their are .markets to access of benefit companies tourism While tourism based-forest from disproportionately small even that evidence is there, schemes people local benefit can tourism based￾nature from tourist per transfers cash absolute project CAMPFIRE the are Examples. significantly of Department, Trust Zimbabwe (Zimbabwe in and, Management Wildlife and Parks National Annapurna the), 1994, Association CAMPFIRE and Gurung (Nepal in Project Area Conservation ecotourism international), 1994, Coursey and) 1999, Wunder (Ecuador in operations in areas forest in tourism controlled nationally .(2000, Wunder (Brazil benefits indirect and Employment poverty alleviating about known is little Very sector forest informal or formal through such, benefits indirect through and employment .effects down-trickle or effects multiplier local as the, available is evidence empirical limited As about information basic only lists section present .aspects these were there, 1990s late the In. Employment formal the in employees million 4.17 roughly million 47 roughly and, worldwide sector forest ,ILO (included also was employment informal if understood is employment sector Forest). 2001 including (forestry encompassing as here furniture including (industries wood), logging as but, production paper and pulp and) making forest government in employees excluding ,transport the in involved people and services are who products forest of trade and marketing study A. firms industry forest by employed not percent 35 to 13 for accounted enterprises based￾forest that found countries developing six of employment enterprise rural scale-small all of .(1987, FAO( forestry that possible is It. effects multiplier Local local through poverty alleviate activities forest a opening, example For. effects multiplier workforce logging a in bringing and concession as, services and goods, food for demand a creates ,Likewise. opportunities employment as well the enables only not road logging a of creation to access up opens also but, logs of transport increasing potentially, goods other for markets access people local give also can It. incomes local .services schooling and health outside to be also must effects negative, However NWFP reduced are which among, considered conflicts, forests over-logged from production resulting disruptions and companies logging with the after boom economic the of collapse the from .ended has logging about known is enough Not. effects down-Trickle poverty to contributes forestry which to extent the economic overall on impact its through reduction products forest cheaper whether about or, growth the improve supplies market increased from The. consumers urban of status economic domestic gross to sector forest the of contribution in fraction small a be to tends) GDP (product ,noted be should It. countries developing most the for figure added-value the that, however ,total the underestimates significantly sector forest are products forest of share large a as inasmuch for used are they because registered not ,Moreover. markets local on trade and subsistence simple the reflect also can contributions GDP low not are products forest cases many in that fact .(1999, Simpson (cheap therefore are and scarce often wealth timber although, Furthermore to tends it, GDP of share small a only represents the as, development economic for important be