Benefícios indiretos da floresta.

Abstract

No presente trabalho, foram apresentados os métodos para avaliar os benefícios indiretos da floresta. Após exposições sobre a definição, as diferenças entre os conceitos e as características dos benefícios indiretos, foram descritos os problemas fundamentais da avaliação e as vantagens e desvantagens dos diferentes métodos. A última parte do estudo trata dos incentivos atuais e problemas a contexto, adotados na Alemanha, na produção florestal.

Landscape Valuation of Environmental Amenities throughout the Application of Direct and Indirect Methods

“…-The results obtained for the subunit agricultural and production areas corroborate with the conclusions drawn by Panagopoulos [10], according to which the organization of agricultural production landscapes tends to be associated with a low aesthetic quality; -Although marshes are considered as one of the richest ecosystems in environmental and ecological perspectives, it appears that, regarding landscape visual quality, this ecosystem/landscape subunit is characterized by low values, when compared to other landscape subunits considered in the present study; -Though the subunit Touristic Complex and Golf obtained the highest result considering respondents' preferences, the fact that the "Presence of Water" parameter was considered as the most relevant to landscape quality might have influenced the results; -While about half of the respondents agree that the construction developments along the riverbanks contribute to the degradation of landscape quality, it appears that the touristic complex and golf subunit, which corresponds to the various buildings associated with tourism developments, was the one that obtained a higher preference; -Although it is considered important that each visitor spent on average about 50 Euros to visit this landscape, it should be noted that this value may be overinflated considering the assumptions made by Seling and Spathelf [20], according to which the money spent in certain trips cannot be exclusively attributed to a specific component of the trip. Furthermore, the importance of this landscape at regional, national and international levels is supported by the analysis of the residence areas of each of the respondents/boat users, since approximately 70% had to travel more than 50 kilometers to visit this landscape.…”

“…This method may be defined according to Oesten [19] as an evaluation whereby the value of an indirect benefit is attributed based on the average cost spent by a given set of individuals to reach a particular good or service without defined market cost. Still, this method works with some assumptions [20] which may be considered a limitation of the method: (I) it is considered that each person is traveling alone, even if it was a group journey; (II) it considers that the visit or travel to the amenity in question was the sole reason for the trip, even if there were others. However, regardless of the limitations that are inherent in the direct application of the method, it is generally recognized that it enables the definition of a demand curve for a particular environmental/recreational amenity, where the number of visits is a function not only of travel costs, but also of other socio-economic variables [18,21], thus defining the possible added value to the enjoyment of the natural resource/amenity.…”