Session 14 ic2011 tibbets

271 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
271
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Session 14 ic2011 tibbets

  1. 1. The Lacey Act and its Implicationsfor the Forest Products Industry Ashlee Tibbets Oregon State University
  2. 2. General Introduction• What is illegal logging?• Why should we care?• How has it impacted the United States?• What has been done globally?• What has the United States done? 2
  3. 3. General Introduction“Illegal logging, associated trade and corruptionincrease environmental degradation, biodiversityloss, and deforestation and hence climate systems.Illegal logging also damages the livelihoods in thepoorest countries, causes loss of revenues togovernments, distorts markets and trade andsustains conflicts.” -Leaders of world’s largest consumercountries (EIA 2007) 3
  4. 4. Roadmap of this presentationResearch ObjectivesIllegal LoggingLacey ActPreliminary ResultsPlans for the Future 4
  5. 5. Research Objectives: PrimaryUnderstand how the forest products wholesaleindustry is working with and responding to theLacey Act. 5
  6. 6. Research Objectives: SecondaryEnhance understanding regarding how forestproducts wholesalers in the U.S. view and complywith the Lacey ActEnhance understanding regarding how managerssee the present and future implications of theLacey Act.Unveil possible communication shortcomingsbetween the U.S. government and companies 6
  7. 7. Illegal Logging backdropIllegal deforestation and forest degradationcontributes: (INECE 2010)  1/5 GHG emissions  Habitat destruction  Biodiversity loss  Billions of dollars of government revenue 7
  8. 8. Illegal Logging backdropExport-oriented illegal loggingDoes not benefit communities or governments who should be benefiting (EIA 2007)Estimated $15 billion annual loss to developing countries (World Bank 2006)Supply and Demand 8
  9. 9. Lacey Act: Inclusion of plants1900Originally intended to protect the interests ofagriculture, horticulture, forestry, or to wildlifeor the wildlife resources of the U.S. (FWS 2009)In 2008, the terms “plant” and “plant product”were added to the protected species list Excludes common food crops and scientific specimens of plant material (e.g. genetic alterations) 9
  10. 10. Lacey Act: Enforcement4 government bodiesFish and Wildlife ServiceDepartment of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)U.S. CustomsHomeland Security 10
  11. 11. Lacey Act: U.S. Forest ProductsIndustry1. Prohibits trade in illegally sourced material2. Requires documentation - Country of origin - Species name - Quantity and value3. Establishes penalties - Forfeiture of goods - Fines - Jail 11
  12. 12. Lacey Act: Illegality and Due CareIllegalities Due Diligence• Theft of plants Intended to encourage log• Taking plants from buyers to ask questions of protected areas their suppliers in order to• Taking plants without reinforce the idea that the U.S. authorization is no longer interested in buying illegally sourced wood• Failure to pay products. royalties/taxes associated• Disregard export laws (such as log-export bans) Different due diligence program for every company 12
  13. 13. Research Methods• Online questionnaire was sent to members of the Portland Wholesale Lumber Association (PWLA) and the North American Wholesale Lumber Association (NAWLA).• Over 500 questionnaire were sent – 80 bad emails – Total questionnaires returned: 35 13
  14. 14. Preliminary ResultsLacey basicsWhere do respondents go with questions?Due diligence practicesGlobal perspective Communication 14
  15. 15. Preliminary ResultsLacey basicsWhere do respondents go with questions?Due diligence practicesGlobal perspective Communication 15
  16. 16. Preliminary Results: Lacey Basics70% well-versed in environmental policy20% well-versed in the Lacey Act -Respondents failed the knowledge questionsCould indicate• Inadequately communicated• Respondent was not the Lacey expert 16
  17. 17. Preliminary ResultsLacey basicsWhere do respondents go with questions?Due diligence practicesGlobal perspective Communication 17
  18. 18. Preliminary Results: Questions20% use official government resourcesOthers include: international shipping agencies, personal contacts, internet searchesCould indicate• Subpar usability of websites• Business aren’t aware of resources 18
  19. 19. Preliminary ResultsLacey basicsWhere do respondents go with questions?Due diligence practicesGlobal perspective 19
  20. 20. Preliminary Results: Due DiligenceVariety of answers -honest middlemen -visit country of origin -personal resourcesCompliance does not equal competitivenessCould indicate• How to market compliance• General public doesn’t appreciate compliance 20
  21. 21. Preliminary ResultsLacey basicsWhere do respondents go with questions?Due diligence practicesGlobal perspective Communication 21
  22. 22. Preliminary Results: Global81% “steps should be taken to stop illegal logging”88% “compliance with the Lacey Act will not affect illegal logging”Could indicate•Misunderstand the Lacey Act•Lacey Act is missing a key element 22
  23. 23. Preliminary Results: Global60% “compliance with the Lacey Act will not be beneficial for the United States”66% “the 2008 amendments were unnecessary”100% “the amendments were inadequately communicated to them”Could indicate•Policy makers need a better communication system•Education 23
  24. 24. Further ResearchPersonal interviews with respondents whoindicated they are interestedIncrease sample size 24
  25. 25. Thank you!Chris Knowles: Academic advisorAnne Middleton: Environmental Investigations AgencyOSU Forest Business Solutions group: Sanity Questions? Ashlee.Tibbets@oregonstate.edu 25

×