Cyclone Gabrielle and the negative externalities of forestry clearing – ‘slash’

The impact of the recent Cyclone (Gabrielle) on the North Island of New Zealand have highlighted the problems of soil erosion and the damage from wood debris left behind after harvest (known as ‘slash’). Tonnes of woody debris, mixed in with silt and sediment, blanketed across landscapes, has destroyed critical infrastructure, farms, homes and polluted rivers and the marine coastal environment. Clear-fell harvesting of pine forests on steep erosion-prone land has been identified as a key source of this phenomenon.

Basically the forestry companies are internalising the benefit of forestry clearing but socialising the cost. This means that after they have taken what they want from the forestry plantation they leave unwanted wood – ’slash’. This ‘slash’ then causes huge damage when they is excessive rain in the area. In economic terms this is referred to negative externalities of production as the forestry company has failed to internalise the cost of the wood debris i.e. they have externalised the cost of the damage caused by slash. The New Zealand Government are to investigate the poor forestry harvesting and management and regulate practices in clearing of forestry land. This issue can be represented by a negative externalities of production graph which is part of the A2 and NCEA Level 3 syllabuses.

  • When there is a negative production externality, marginal social cost (MSC) exceeds marginal private cost (MPC), as in Figure 1.
  • Firms take decisions on the basis of MPC, so the market settles at Q1, rather than at Q*.
  • The shaded area represents the welfare loss for society in this position – i.e. the damage caused by ‘slash’.
  • This is where there is ‘slash’ caused by the forestry companies which imposes costs on households, farms, infrastructure etc that are not reflected in the costs faced by the forestry company.

Externalities – Key definitions

  • Private cost or benefit: a cost that is incurred (or a benefit that is enjoyed) by an individual (firm or household) as part of its economic activities
  • External cost: a cost that is associated with an individual firm or household’s production or other economic activities that is borne by a third party, and is not reflected in market prices
  • Social cost: private cost plus external costs
  • Marginal social cost: the cost to society of producing an extra unit of a good
  • External benefit: a benefit that is associated with an individual firm or household’s production or other economic activities that is received by a third party, and is not reflected in market prices
  • Social benefit: private benefit plus external benefits
  • Marginal social benefit: the benefit received by society from consuming an extra unit of a good

Sign up to elearneconomics for comprehensive key notes with coloured illustrations, flash cards, written answers and multiple-choice tests on Externalities that provides for users with different learning styles working at their own pace (anywhere at any time).


Shipping Industry pays for Negative Externalities – is it fair?

ShippingThe shipping industry is taking a big hit on two fronts as it tries to stay afloat. With the current global conditions the industry itself is in the middle of a major downturn as there is too much supply chasing too little demand. To make matters worse the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) has introduced stricter environmental regulations to curb pollution – negative externalities. New regulations that ships have to adhere to:

1. Ships now have to burn cleaner and better grade fuel like diesel – ships used to burn cheap unrefined crude. This means a 50% increase in the cost of fuel
2. The IMO is making ship operators buy tradeable permits to emit CO2.
3. They are also introducing new standards for cleaner ballast water. It has been estimated that approximately 60,000 ships would need to be refitted and that would cost up to $1.7m each.
4. The EU are also proposing to introduce recycling levies on vessels calling at EU ports to pay for the safer scrapping of old ships

Is this fair? 90% of global trade is carried on shipping containers but they only emit 2.7% of the CO2 in the world. It seems that as a lobby group the shipping industry has been too fragmented and unable to influence policy like that of the airlines. See graph below for negative externalities.

Gulf oil spill - negative externalities