The industry organization is one of the main critics of the proposals presented by the Environmental Objectives Committee on how Sweden will achieve the climate goals for the forestry sector. Above all, they react to the proposal that private forest owners can enter into agreements to extend the rotation periods for their forests.
By rotation period, we mean the time between regeneration and harvesting of a forest stand. A longer such period gives more carbon sequestration and benefits biodiversity, but also entails a cost for the forestry industry.
"Hits the national economy"
According to the Forest Industries' calculations, this would affect around 7,000 jobs and also mean a loss of approximately 6.5 percent of the industry's wood consumption.
This hits the national economy, but it primarily hits those who are employed in the industry and those who own and invest in the companies. Both consequences are important, says Magnus Berg, chief of business policy for the Forest Industries to TT.
Will be able to receive compensation
However, forest owners will be able to receive compensation if they choose to extend the rotation period. There is no requirement, but rather it is based on voluntary commitments.
Doesn't the compensation make up for this?
If the perspective is the individual forest owner, then it is entirely correct. We think, however, that it lacks a perspective on what the consequences will be for Sweden's economy as a whole. They propose allocating almost 2.5 billion on these agreements. However, it reduces the annual added value in Sweden by 8 billion kronor, and that aspect is important to highlight.
If it is the case that this can benefit, for example, biodiversity, is it not an economic consequence one has to be willing to take?
We think that more precise tools should be used. Extended rotation periods can be beneficial for certain species and in certain places, but this is a general tool where the rotation period is extended regardless of the value on that particular land.
Corrected version: In an earlier text, it stated 10 billion, should be 8 billion.
