8.1.1 Conceptual Foundations of Decent Work and Economic Growth

Since the early twentieth century, the core of prevalent socio-economic and political systems has been economic growth. This has fundamentally and irreversibly reshaped societies and the entire planet (Schmelzer Reference Schmelzer and Caradonna2017). In the aftermath of World War II, emerging theories and paradigms for developing non-industrialised countries in the Global South were largely based on the premise of economic growth (e.g. modernisation theory), if not overtly labelled as such (economic growth theory).

The concept of decent work, however, only appeared at the end of the twentieth century. Tensions between economic relationships and their social context arose in the late nineteenth century (Rodgers Reference Rodgers2007), addressed by the emerging trade unions. Yet it was not until 1999 that the International Labour Organization (ILO) launched the concept of decent work. Its emergence reflected new development theories and paradigms that sought to overcome the limitations of the modernisation and economic growth theories and associated policies. Nurtured by Maslow’s theory of human motivation, the 1970s laid the foundation for a development theory of human needs (Max-Neef et al. Reference Max-Neef, Elizalde, Hopenhayn, Elkins and Max-Neef1992). The resulting basic-needs paradigm reformed development programmes in the 1980s by integrating social indicators into the measurement of economic growth. Environmental indicators were added in the 1990s as the sustainable development paradigm emerged in response to global environmental degradation (Lélé Reference Lélé1991).

Policies and strategies based on diverse development theories and paradigms have varied effects on forests and forest-dependent livelihoods. This chapter introduces an analytical framework illustrating the evolution of such theories and paradigms, the contextual conditions shaped by them and the principal drivers determining the impact of SDG 8 implementation on forests and people dependent on them (Section 8.2). We then present key actors and stakeholders in the forest and other natural resource sectors and the latter’s contributions to national economies. The subsequent assessment of anticipated impacts (Section 8.3) addresses forest-based economic growth and decent work in forest product value chains (FPVC) from livelihoods, enterprise and conservation perspectives. Synergies and trade-offs are then discussed, within SDG 8 implementation, and with other SDGs (Section 8.4). We conclude with an outlook on how overarching development paradigms lead to varying prioritisations of SDG 8 targets, and how decoupling economic growth from forest-related degradation will continue to be a challenge for countries seeking economic growth in natural resource sectors other than the forest sector (Section 8.5).

8.1.2 Indicators for Decent Work and Economic Growth

The SDG 8 targets and indicators reflect a firm grounding in economic growth paradigms and, to some extent, the paradigmatic evolution to a more integrated set of indicators, including social and environmental aspects (Table 8.1).

The SDG 8 targets and indicators align with the ILO (2018a) framework on the measurement of decent work, which is closely linked to four strategic pillars: (1) international labour standards and fundamental principles and rights at work, (2) employment creation, (3) social protection and (4) social dialogue and tripartism.

8.2.1 Development Paradigms Driving Policies, Institutions and Markets

How ‘less developed’ countries can follow the pathway of ‘developed’ countries, or how they can be ‘modernised’, has been disputed by social scientists for more than a century. This debate has influenced development thinking and policymaking around the globe. In response to challenges and opportunities facing the developing world in the postcolonial era, the modernisation paradigm was developed in the 1950s. Advocates such as Rostow (Reference Rostow1959) assumed a universal evolutionary path from traditional societies to the age of high mass consumption. The underlying assumption of relatively uniform, linear modernisation pathways was soon criticised. It was argued that the societal boundaries, political and economic institutions, and the social distribution of power underlying the absence of ‘modern’ societies had to be identified and solutions be developed accordingly (Tipps Reference Tipps1973).

Despite such criticism, the modernisation paradigm has strongly influenced development policies and strategies worldwide, with economic growth at its core and a simplistic equation: industrial transformation equals economic growth, which, in turn, allows poorer countries to catch up with industrialised countries. Eventually, economic growth would generate broader societal wealth through trickle-down effects (Thornton et al. Reference Thornton, Agnello and Link1978).

The modernisation and growth paradigms have had a strong imprint on tropical forests and, to some extent, temperate ones too. Starting in the 1950s, governments have increasingly treated forests as a natural capital reserve to be exploited for industrial transformation – initially through log sales, and progressively through value-added products. Processes of forest-based industrialisation occurred in several waves across forest-rich regions along the tropical belt: West Africa (1950s–70s), Southeast Asia (1960s–80s) and, more recently, the Congo and Amazon basins. However, the prevalent view of development as a purely economic phenomenon securing jobs and economic opportunities for the masses soon turned out to be a myth (Arndt Reference Arndt1983). When the waves started to ebb in the late 1970s it became evident that industrialisation based on natural resource processing is likely to perpetuate the pattern of dualism and inequality present in typical resource-rich countries, rather than leading to efficient growth, employment creation, greater equity and economic independence (Roemer Reference Roemer1979). The model of a ‘dual economy’ (Lewis Reference Lewis1954), which assumes that the agricultural sector (including forestry) generates the capital necessary for take-off towards industrialisation before becoming redundant, was shown to ignore the positive link between growth in industry and agricultural growth (Verner and Blunch Reference Verner and Blunch1999).

Over the past decades, new theories and models have emerged that provide a more nuanced picture of development processes: ‘basic needs’ (1970s), ‘sustainable development’ (early 1990s), ‘sustainable livelihoods’ and ‘green growth’ (both late 1990s). These are reflected in the Millennium Development Goals (2000), followed by the Sustainable Development Goals (2015). Lately, it has been suggested that alternative measures to GDP are needed, such as the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI),Footnote ¹ World Values Survey (WVS),Footnote ² Happy Planet Index (HPI)Footnote ³ and Better Life IndexFootnote ⁴ (Costanza et al. Reference Costanza, Kubiszewski and Giovannini2014).

Despite these conceptual advances, many factors that have long been driving economic policy in relation to natural resources are still at play. While protected areas in tropical countries have been expanded and forest ecosystem services figure more prominently on political agendas, development policies, institutions and markets continue to be largely driven by modernisation and economic growth paradigms. This prompts the question of what effects these paradigms have on the natural resource base of tropical countries and economic activities based on them – a question this chapter addresses with a view on forests and FPVC.

8.2.2 Analytical Framework

Our analytical framework for assessing the potential impacts of SDG 8 on forests and forest-dependent livelihoods has been derived from our own reflection, insight and conceptualisation. It accounts for the development theories and paradigms outlined in the previous section as well as contextual conditions that determine the impact of principal drivers:

• political–legal framework: principal policies geared towards forest, agriculture, energy, mining, tourism sectors;

• institutional support environment: technical and financial assistance by government agencies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), the private sector;

• macroeconomic conditions: composition and evolution of GDP, formal and informal employment, standard of living;

• market forces: supply–demand patterns in the forest, agriculture, energy, mining, tourism sectors;

• status of the forest resource base: forest cover, degradation and deforestation; institutional arrangements for protecting forests;

• cultural contexts: importance of forests at societal, communal levels.

The analytical framework also accounts for interactions with policies and trends in relation to other natural resource sectors (agriculture, energy, mining) and associated services (tourism, provision of ecosystem services).

Within the forest sector, our assessment focuses on the following stakeholders:

• national and local governments

• international and local NGOs

• multinational and national companies

• corporate associations

• small and medium enterprises

• Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups dependent on forests

We assess the impact of SDG 8 on the forest sector with a view on the forest industry, forest-dependent people and the forest resource base (Figure 8.1).

Figure 8.1 Analytical framework for assessing the impact of SDG 8 on forests and forest-dependent people.

8.2.3 Key Actors and Stakeholders

Our analytical framework distinguishes between key actors influencing the design and implementation of policies and strategies for achieving SDG 8 on the one hand, and forest-sector stakeholders affected by these policies and strategies on the other. Key actors in the political arena are national and local governments, with their legislative, regulatory and executive powers varying according to governance structures and the degree of decentralisation. Principal stakeholders are forest users, including the forest industry and forest-dependent people. Further stakeholders are civil society organisations, ranging from local and international NGOs to corporate associations, and society as a whole. Depending on their role inside or outside of FPVC and their influence on political–legal and regulatory decisions, given groups may be both key actors and stakeholders. Their interactions are complex, as are the forest-tenure arrangements underlying interactions. In our assessment of statutory forest tenure (Table 8.2) and subsequent analyses, we focus on the top 10 countries with largest forest area (Top10-LFA) which account for 50 per cent of the global forest area and represent both industrialised (Australia, Canada, Russian Federation, United States) and emerging or developing economies (Brazil, China, DR Congo, India, Indonesia, Peru).

Table 8.2 reflects that, across the 58 countries studied, 72 per cent of the forest area in 2017 was publicly administered, while an increasing portion is owned by Indigenous peoples and local communities (13 per cent) or has been designated to them for their use (2.3 per cent). Forest tenure varies significantly across the Top10-LFA, ranging from countries where most of the forests are publicly owned and controlled (Russian Federation, DR Congo, India, Indonesia) to countries with incipient (Canada), moderate (Australia, Peru) or strong (Brazil, China) devolution of forest tenure and rights to local communities. In Australia, Brazil, Canada, India and the United States, significant portions of forests are owned by individuals and firms and, across the 58 countries studied, 12 per cent of the forest area was privately owned in 2017 (RRI 2018). On a global scale, the area of publicly owned forests for which management rights have been granted to private companies under concessionary or licensing agreements has increased from 6 per cent in 1990 to 14 per cent in 2010, as has the area of forests within protected areas which reached 16 per cent of global forest area in 2015 (FAO 2016). Not reflected in these figures are overlapping claims between publicly or privately owned forests and those under local customary rights.

8.2.4 Natural Resource Sectors and Their Contributions to National Economies

8.3.1 Forest-Based Economic Growth

FAO (2018) holds that forests and FPVC are of critical importance for sustained economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all, especially in remote areas. While at the national level manufacturing, services and other natural resource sectors are principal sources of economic growth and employment, remote forest areas rely to a much higher extent on the forest sector (Angelsen et al. Reference Angelsen, Jagger and Babigumira2014). Yet, many tropical countries struggle to achieve sustainable work opportunities and economic growth based on their forest riches (Swamy et al. Reference Swamy, Drazen, Johnson and Bukoski2018). Only a few countries (e.g. Thailand and Malaysia) have successfully used their forest resources to trigger broad-based economic growth spilling over to other natural resource sectors, and from there to manufacturing and services. The nominal GDP contributions of the forest sector do not motivate policies to develop its untapped potential. At the same time, the absence of policies promoting forest-sector development underlies its widespread stagnation in tropical regions. Political disinterest can also be attributed to a general dearth of reliable data on overall contributions of forests to national economies, spanning formal and informal employment, and timber and NTFP value chains.

Fairly robust data are available for the formal forest sector, particularly as regards the wood-based industry. Global employment in the formal forest sector decreased by about 6 per cent over the past decade, from 14.0 million people in full-time equivalents in 2000 to 13.2 million in 2011 (Lebedys and Yanshu Reference Lebedys and Yanshu2014). The decline was most pronounced in the forestry sub-sectorFootnote ⁷ (21 per cent) and in the developed regions. Losses were partly offset by increased formal forestry employment in developing regions, where most of the estimated 41 million people in the informal forest-sector work (FAO 2014).

In the Global South, roundwood production is relatively more important than wood processing and the production of pulp and paper. Global value-adding across the three sub-sectors has only slightly increased (5 per cent), from USD 583 billion in 2000 (at 2011 prices and exchange rates) to USD 606 billion in 2011. The pulp and paper industry contributes most to the global gross value-added (44 per cent), followed by the wood industry and the forestry sub-sector (28 per cent each). Overall distribution of value-added across the sub-sectors remained stable in the 2000s, but the share of the pulp and paper industry has recently declined (FAO 2014).

Refined metrics are needed to fully document actual and potential contributions of the forest sector to economic growth and decent work, as are sub-national policies and strategies to promote forest-sector development in regions where there are few alternatives. These, in turn, need to promote formal employment opportunities, especially for young people, reduce labour market inequality (gender pay gap), promote safe and secure working environments, and improve access to financial services to ensure sustained and inclusive economic growth (UN 2018). Given the intrinsic differences between timber and NTFP value chains, gender-differentiated approaches are required that increase employment and income opportunities for women, particularly in NTFP value chains (see Sunderland et al. Reference Sunderland, Achdiawan and Angelsen2014).

The positive impact of SDG 8 on the forest sector may be supported by voluntary sustainability standards. Forest certification has had positive effects on indicators related to decent work, particularly regarding social security and forest worker safety (see Cashore et al. Reference Cashore, Gale, Meidinger and Newsom2006). There is little evidence, however, that forest certification leads to significant economic growth in tropical countries (Romero et al. Reference Romero, Sills and Guariguata2017). Similarly, the advance of ‘zero deforestation’ and similar eco-labels for agricultural commodities associated with deforestation (e.g. soy, palm oil, cocoa) have yet to show significant impacts on forest loss (van der Ven et al. Reference van der Ven, Rothacker and Cashore2018).

Looking forward, the potential of the forest sector to contribute to SDG 8 largely relates to developing markets and value chains for sustainable timber and NTFPs that stimulate economic growth, provide gender- and age-differentiated employment opportunities, and ensure forest conservation. In tropical and other forest regions, sustainable tourism has the potential for promoting both economic growth and decent work. Where robust mechanisms can be established, such endeavours may be complemented with payments for environmental services.

8.3.2 Decent Work along Forest Product Value Chains

ILO’s guiding framework for international labour standards comprises 8 fundamental, 4 governance and 177 technical conventions. One of the fundamental conventions and 6 technical ones were crafted after ILO’s proclamation of ‘decent work’ in 1999. The fundamental one relates to the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention (1999), and the pertinent technical ones are Maternity Protection (2000), Safety and Health in Agriculture (2001) and Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health (2006) (ILO 2018b). While the other fundamental conventions predate the proclamation of decent work, they are closely linked to the concept. Table 8.6 illustrates the status of these conventions for the Top10-LFA.

Table 8.6 shows that five of the Top10-LFA have ratified all eight of ILO’s fundamental conventions: Canada, DR Congo, Indonesia, Peru and the Russian Federation. Two conventions crucial for SMFE development have yet to be ratified by several countries: Freedom of Association & Protection of the Right to Organise, and Right to Organise & Collective Bargaining. In addition, effective enforcement mechanisms need to be in place to ensure these rights, as shown in countries where conventions have been ratified but implementation is lacking (e.g. DR Congo).

Several ILO conventions have direct links with SDG 8 targets and indicators, particularly Targets 8.3 (SMEs), 8.5 (productive employment and decent work), 8.6 (youth employment), 8.7 (forced labour) and 8.8 (labour rights and safety). While most Top10-LFA have ratified the conventions pertinent to Target 8.5 (except China and the United States), they lag behind in the ratification of those relating to Targets 8.3 (rights to organise), 8.6 (night work of young persons) and 8.8 (night work of women, migrant workers). The latter is particularly problematic as women and migrant workers play prominent roles in the informal forest sector. This underlines the importance of enabling environments comprising the ratification of international conventions, their translation into national policies and the formalisation of all nodes of FPVC.

Decent work may also be offered in tree crop value chains by enterprises engaged in larger schemes that replace natural forests: for example, oil palm, rubber, timber and cocoa plantations. Employment effects are often significant but, in addition to environmental externalities, labour conditions may be precarious (e.g. labour safety in sawmills, exposure to agrochemicals). Labour conditions in the first nodes of forest product and tree crop value chains may become less attractive to the younger generation which, through increased availability of educational services in rural areas, are prompted to search out livelihood options other than forestry or agriculture. At the same time, better formal education fosters skills required for developing SMFE that provide local opportunities for educated youth. Along with better access to modern information and communication technologies (ICT), there will be increased opportunities for them as managers of such enterprises.

8.3.3 Forest-Dependent Livelihoods

Forest-dependent people vary widely, as do their relationships with forests (e.g. formal or customary rights), their livelihoods (e.g. forest and non-forest activities) and their demands on forests and the broader resource system (e.g. products and ecosystem services). Official accounts rarely capture the intrinsic nature of such relationships and tend to underestimate the monetary and non-monetary values of forests to these people and society. As forests continue to be degraded or converted to other land uses, forest-dependent people may be forced into other livelihood activities in their respective locations, move further into the forest or out-migrate altogether. At the same time, the rights of forest-dependent communities are progressively being recognised (RRI 2017), providing an institutional environment enabling them to determine livelihood shifts more autonomously rather than responding to externally driven pressures.

8.3.4 Gender, Intergenerational and Ethnic Equity

Empowerment of forest-dependent communities, including participation in decision making and strengthening of livelihoods, is closely linked to gender, age and ethnicity. Access to land and natural resources is a critical entry point for empowering women and marginalised groups as it defines social status and political power and structures relationships within and outside the household (Agarwal Reference Agarwal1994). Official statistics on differentiated access to forest resources are scarce, as is information on women, youth and other vulnerable groups in relation to their participation as labour force in the forest sector. Given the often seasonal nature of forest-based activities, their participation tends to be intermittent, informal and underpaid (FAO 2018).

This lack of recognition influences policymaking. In many cases, women, indigenous peoples and other marginalised groups are not considered beneficiaries unless programmes target them explicitly (Larson et al. Reference Larson, Monterroso and Canturias2018). Despite important gender differentiation in the collection of forest products, with distinctive ‘male’ and ‘female’ roles (Sunderland et al. Reference Sunderland, Achdiawan and Angelsen2014), forests continue to be perceived as a ‘male domain’ and development interventions are often designed accordingly. Combined, these factors tend to perpetuate the position of women and other marginalised groups in the informal part of the forest sector, with the associated underestimation of their contributions to sector development. In countries such as Guatemala and Cameroon, where community rights to forests are formalised and where internal governance structures do not unduly favour male dominance or that of certain economic strata, women, youth and indigenous peoples can play important roles in the management of CFEs (see Belibi et al. Reference Belibi, van Eijnatten, Mala and Ingram2015, Stoian et al. Reference Stoian, Rodas, Butler, Monterroso and Hodgdon2019).

8.3.5 Forest Conservation

Despite a 15 per cent reduction in the global rate of net forest loss from 1990 to 2015 (FAO 2016), forests and associated biodiversity continue to be threatened. While SDG 8 seeks to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation, there is also an opportunity to couple economic growth with forest conservation and sustainable resource management. For example, community-based forest management can link forest conservation with economic growth and livelihoods improvement through SMFE development and tourism (Macqueen et al. Reference Macqueen, Bolin, Greijmans, Grouwels and Humphries2018). The relationship between forest concessions managed by private companies, forest conservation and local economic development is less clear (see FAO and EFI 2018). While inappropriate logging can lead to forest degradation, the primary drivers of deforestation lie outside the forest sector: commercial and subsistence/local agriculture, followed by infrastructure development, mining and urban sprawl (Hosonuma et al. Reference Hosonuma, Herold and De Sy2012).

Forest conservation needs to be achieved from both outside, by checking extra-sectoral drivers of deforestation, and from within through SFM or preservation with limited human intervention. A comparative analysis of 40 protected areas and 33 community-managed forests showed that annual deforestation rates in the latter were lower and less variable than those in protected forests; forest conservation strategies should therefore encompass a regional differentiation of land use types, tenure rights, social and economic needs of local inhabitants, and local capacities (Porter-Bolland et al. Reference Porter-Bolland, Ellis and Guariguata2012).

In regions where deforestation has been reduced or halted, opportunities exist for initiating landscape restoration. Diverse combinations of agroforestry systems and timber plantations can stimulate economic growth and recover ecosystem services, with the bottom line that forest, agroforestry and plantation forestry options generate income comparable to alternative land uses (Appanah Reference Appanah2016).

8.3.6 Anticipated Impacts within the Framework of SDG 8

Principal synergies between SDG 8 and forests can be expected for areas where national policies for economic growth and decent work explicitly target the forest sector, and where these are paired with adequate legislation for sustainable management and conservation of forests and effective enforcement mechanisms. Several tropical countries provide monetary incentives for carbon sequestration through reforestation (Baker et al. Reference Baker, Wade, Sohngen, Ohrel and Fawcett2019), with payments typically varying between USD 800 and USD 1500 per ha. The establishment of timber plantations has important employment effects, as shown for Brazil, China and Indonesia (Tomberlin et al. Reference Tomberlin, Buongiorno, Alegría, Korhonen, Palo, Palo, Uusivuori and Mery2001). Some countries also provide incentives for managing natural forests for timber and NTFPs (Agrawal et al. Reference Agrawal, Hajjar, Liao, Rasmussen and Watkins2018), generating local employment and value added. Community-based forest management and processing of forest products by CFEs can be combined with ecotourism to generate additional employment and income, as documented for Petén, Guatemala (Stoian et al. Reference Stoian, Rodas, Butler, Monterroso and Hodgdon2019).

While such synergies have important employment effects at local and regional levels, their impact at national and global scales will continue to be modest in light of the limited contributions of the forest sector to GDP – 0.2 per cent worldwide and 0.7 per cent in lower-middle-income countries (World Bank 2017). Accounting for the informal sector could double forest-sector contributions to GDP (World Bank 2016), but contributions of other natural resource sectors will continue to outperform those of the forest sector in many tropical countries. This holds particularly for the agricultural and mining sectors and, depending on the energy mix in a given country, the energy sector. Most governments have long pursued growth strategies based on modernisation and economic growth theories. Without a major paradigm shift, national policies will continue to prioritise the natural resource sectors that contribute most to GDP.

Principle trade-offs within SDG 8 implementation, particularly as regards deforestation, relate to policies for competing natural resource sectors. But some trade-offs are also expected for areas of potential synergy. For example, a systematic review of the socio-economic impacts of large-scale tree plantations found ambiguous impacts: slightly positive for employment, mixed regarding livelihoods and negative for land and intertwined social factors (Malkamäki et al. Reference Malkamäki, D’Amato and Hogarth2018). Strong global evidence on long-term socio-economic impacts of large-scale tree plantations remains limited (Malkamäki et al. Reference Malkamäki, D’Amato and Hogarth2018). Similarly, the evidence base for inferring positive effects between ecotourism and forests is insufficient (Brandt and Buckley Reference Buckley and Buckley2018). A recent review on development policies in relation to the SDGs found that many commonly applied development interventions do not explicitly consider natural resources, let alone forests, leading to suboptimal, unsustainable outcomes; even if interventions tackle both development and conservation goals, they often lack coordination and sufficient levels of natural capital to ensure long-term sustainability (Miteva Reference Miteva2019).