Are you looking for Applied Sciences Custom Help? Look no further; we have the most experienced Applied Sciences to write, edit, proofread or format your paper.
The paper is a response to the article The Science of Why We Don’t Believe Science written by Chris Mooney and the book the power of Habit: Why we do what we do in life and business written byCharles Duhigg. According to Mooney (2011), the human mind is full of doubt and disbelief. Human believes the issue and occurrence after it happens or perceives a physical evidence. The writer compared the human disbelieve of the science with the 1950s scientist prediction of the global warming. Human neglected this issue saying it is too early. Currently, global warming is a major concern of the whole world. Kyoto Protocol established in 2005 to curb the emission of greenhouse gasses like carbon IV oxide, and methane could not exist if the world believed on scientist prediction of the 1950s. The majority of the countries are experiencing climate change as a result of global warming because of human arrogance. I think it’s high time human to start believing in science so as to curb environmental dangers that can result from economic activities and ignorance.
Chris Mooney indicates the major reason that makes many people not believe in science is religion belief. It is very hard to change the group of religion devotee who consequently speaks to the alien. According to Mooney (2011), in Chicago, there is a cult where humans can speak to an alien. They believe Jesus Christ is in control of everything that happens in life. The cult lies, and in most cases, it leads to human delusion. The believer of the cult they contradict the biological process and characteristics living organism with the notion they get from non-scientific evidence from the holy books or evangelism. I agree that evangelism is the key determinant that makes many people never believe in science. For instance, the majority of the deities inform believers, there is life after death, which contradicts with scientific facts.
Duhigg (2012) talks about three concepts of habits, which are the habit loop, Golden Rule of Habit and Keystone Habits. The three concept of habit they are the one that determines the human conscience and how they will conduct their life and business. Habit loop comprises of the three major fundamentals, which include routine, cue, and reward. Cue is prompt to the brain on which habit to choose. Routine is the physical action response of the habit integrated into the brain. Physical routine can be emotional, calm, or composed. The reward is the outcome of the routine physical action, which can be impressive or upsetting. The general rule of habit is the general rule that is used to stop the habit of the person. Keystone habit Indicate you cannot change the habit of a person by forcing them. Some of the individuals are much influential in that they can persuade and change the habit of a big group a good example is a CEO changing the habit of employees. I approve Duhigg concepts of habit since habit is something that one need to learn for a particular period. After perceiving, the habit is translated into action, which can be good or bad. As per society believe one are rewarded from the habit that they express. To stop addiction of the habit, there is general protocol followed to prevent reoccurrence of the habit; a good example is a rehabilitation for drug addicts. Forcing and punishing people are not appropriate in changing people habits.
References
Duhigg, C. (2012). The power of Habit: Why we do what we do in life and business (Vol. 34, No. 10). Random House.
Mooney, C. (2011). The science of why we don’t believe science. Mother Jones, 11.
Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount
Data science is the study of data to extract meaningful insights for business. It is a multidisciplinary approach that combines principles and practices from mathematics, statistics, artificial intelligence, and computer engineering to analyze large amounts of data. This analysis helps data scientists to ask and answer questions like what happened, why it happened, what will happen, and what can be done with the results.
Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount
Begin your History of Science timeline using Excel or another template that your instructor approves. Create a timeline and add 5 events to the timeline from the time period “Ancient Sciences,” as defined in this class. The events should cover a wide range of sciences, technology, math, and engineering (i.e., they can’t all be mathematics related or all astronomy-related, etc.). In each major period, you will need to identify and describe at least one event attributed to a member of an underrepresented population (female or minority). Each entry needs a date and 4-5 sentences describing the event, its significance, and a connection to its social context. You will also share one of these events in the forum this week. Be sure to keep a list of sources used in creating your timeline. Ideally, we want to practice APA formatting, so try to provide your references in that format
Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount
Provide a critical perspective on the evolution of cognitive science. In your opinion, what is the most relative historical development of cognitive science, and why? Support your response with a minimum of one scholarly resource.
Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount
How does the scientific method point toward truth? What is truth, and how do you know when you have found it? Access and read the GCU Statement on Integration of Faith and Work. How might a person with the Christian worldview recognize when they have found truth?
Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount
Sustainability has diverse explanations depending on different people. Sustainability is best understood depending on the area it is being used; thus, in an organization, it is first placed in the institution on the operational and managerial level (Opresnik & Taisch, 2015). One conceptualization of sustainability is the ability to maintain something or someone at a certain level or rate. This argument looks at the issue at hand and whether it can be maintained at the same level; thus, this presents the argument of sustainability. Another term, conceptualization, focuses on how one can maintain the standards at a certain level or serve to better them over time. Regarding the environment, sustainability defines the idea of which services and goods are produced through means which do not use resources that are harmful to the environment. However, regardless of the conceptualizations of sustainability, they are all based on the issue of a certain level, which needs to be maintained. They also try to argue on the need to maintain or better something rather than going lower, and they refer to the need to ensure that something is of the expected quality. Sustainability looks at the process by which certain implications of a move are proposed in a bid to maintain them (Pope, Annandale, & Morrison-Saunders, 2004). Therefore, this presents the argument that sustainability requires a process or factors to keep it in check.
Conceptualizations of Livability
Livability has developed alongside sustainability, and it acts as a principle for policy and planning (Ruth & Franklin, 2013). Livability presents a notion of something more tangible, and it is conceptualized as an aspect that shapes infrastructure investments and public perceptions (Ruth & Franklin, 2013). Unlike livability, the concept of sustainability offers a more intangible notion.
The concept of livability can be conceptualized in different ways. The first conceptualization of livability is a concept used in general public discourse and urban planning since it is an issue that represents value, behaviors, and priorities (Gough, 2015). Therefore, livability in this concept has just enough to exist. Livability can be conceptualized as the now and here, focusing on tangible and immediate interventions and conditions (Gough, 2015). This conceptualization contradicts sustainability, which focuses on the needs of the present without compromising those of the future. However, it can focus on the future, but it should not alter that. The argument of sustainability and livability often depends on each other to understand each concept better. Another conceptualization of livability is the notion of living for the moment and not regarding the next moment.
Conceptualization
The conceptualization of sustainability can be defined to mean living in a bid to maintain certain standards or to better them. This argument serves to show that sustainability has to exist where a certain level or limits are set. The conceptualization of livability can be used to refer to living for the present. This presents the argument on the need to live for the moment and individuals acting in ways that offer positive results for the moment. These conceptualizations differ in that one aims at maintaining standards or a certain level while the other one focuses on the moment and how to react to it.
References
Gough, M. Z. (2015). Journal of Planning Education and Research. Reconciling Livability and Sustainability: Conceptual and Practical Implications for Planning, 35(2), 145-160.
Opresnik, D., & Taisch, M. (2015). The Conceptualization of Sustainability in Operations Management. Procedia CIRP, 29, 532-537.
Pope, J., Annandale, D., & Morrison-Saunders, A. (2004). Conceptualising Sustainability Assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24(6), 595-616.
Ruth, M., & Franklin, R. S. (2013, November 14). Livability for all? Conceptual Limits and Practical Implications. HHS Public Access, 18-23.
Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount
Cloud computing refers to a model that enables on-demand network access to a shared pool of computing resources that can be released with minimal interaction with the service provider. Some of the characteristics of cloud computing is that it is service based and there is a broad network access. Within cloud computing, mobile applications have become pervasive and are also key differentiators of competitiveness. From the CIO barometer survey, 50 million devices will have access to the internet by 2020. For caravan exchange, this is relevant as there is a need to create a mobile application from which consumers can access the needed services.
What digital really means
Digital refers to the creation of value at new frontiers, the creation of value in core business, and building foundational capabilities. The three disruptors within the digital space include consumerization of IT, internet of things, and mobile and cloud computing. For caravan exchange, there is a need to capitalize on these aspects to yield competitive advantage. The digital space also implies realigning markets where there is a reduction in transaction costs, and a connection of the supply with demand. By having the business on a digital platform, there will be a capitalization on these aspects.
Exposing New Supply
A business is likely to be vulnerable when customers partially use the product, the production and price are inelastic, the step or fixed costs are high, and the utilization of supply is in an unpredictable or variable way. New supply can also be exposed where disruptors pool redundant capacity through the digitization of physical resources or labor. For caravan exchange, this implies this means that its business operations should be on an online platform.
New and Enhanced Value Propositions
In enhanced value propositions, a business can be vulnerable when information on social media is likely to enrich the product or service. The business is also vulnerable when the customer is the one that goes to get the product. The opportunities that lie are such as the layering of social media on top of services and products, creating new distribution and delivery models, and improving connectivity of physical devices. A business such as caravan exchange involves customers going to get the product. This means that the business should create a system that enables delivery of the product to the customer. Caravan exchange should have facilitations that enable delivering the caravans to the customers who request them.
Reimagined Business Systems
In reimagined business systems, the disruptors are such as redundant value chain activities, repetitive manual labor, and industry margins that are higher than those from other industries. The risks are such that high margins are opportunities for new entrants while redundant value chain activities mean the removal of intermediaries. Caravan exchange business has to ensure that it capitalizes on the opportunities in the digital platforms such as the high margins that are opportunities for new entrants.
Lecture 2
The PWC report
The report highlights the fact that 5.1 million or 44 per cent of Australian jobs are at risk of digital disruption in the next 20 years. 75 percent of the fastest growing jobs require STEM skills where changing only 1 percent of the workforce to fit in the STEM roles is likely to add 57.4 billion dollars to the GDP. While most jobs are transforming into STEM roles, some are not at risk of digital disruption and the top three include teachers, doctors, and nurses. The top three occupations at risk from digital disruption include cashiers, accountants, and administrative roles.
Business/Organizational Pressures
Different pressures are likely to affect a business after it falls within the digital disruption space. From the figure depicted below, the pressures emanate from all areas including the technological area where pressures are in the form of information overload and technological obsolescence and innovations. Some of the pressures within the business environment sector include strong competition and the global economy, powerful customers, and changing workforce. The pressures within the business environment are connected to the pressures in the economic sphere. Such pressures are likely to affect caravan exchange as it functions within a business and economic environment affected by different factors. Essentially this implies a need to anticipate and mitigate some of these pressures for the business to remain competitive.
Digital Future: Informatics
As regards informatics, company directors need to know that information technology has shifted from being a back-office facilitator to a front of the firm tool that is disruptive to the business models. Information technology has also created new forms of competitive advantage where information and communication have become the center piece of modern enterprises. Such has created a business environment where failure to capitalize on the digital transformation is likely to push the business into irrelevance. For caravan exchange, this is relevant on the basis that its business has to be within the digital platform if it is to remain competitive and relevant.
Strategic Management
As regards strategic management, it is essentially about giving direction to the enterprise. The contribution that IT makes in strategic management depends largely on the management’s literacy of IT. Studies have shown that companies with high IT literacy have the capability to perform better than others that do not. Management’s IT literacy is visible from aspects such as customers being connected and demanding, employees are connected, there are capabilities for big data and analytics, and the systems are focused outwards. From such aspects, this means that caravan exchange’s management has to have IT literacy that enables it to have functional systems that are effective in delivering value to the consumers. Such will imply that customers as well as employees are connected and that the system focuses outwards not just on the company.
Porter’s Model
Business investment in IT in the recent years has enabled them to survive in their industries. Therefore, the high demand for IT services as well as products is a positive measure that sustain firms as well as reduce threat of new entrants. Moreover, IT firms has ensured sustained supplies of innovative technology that help in solving major problem in communities.
Lecture 10
Big Data and What is Collecting the Data
Lecture 10 was an introduction to Big Data which is defined as any data whose management is expensive and there is also difficulty in extracting value from it (Kutchuni.edu, 2017). From all data that is currently in existence, 90 percent of the data was created in the last 2 years. The challenges that exist for big data include volume as big data requires large space for storage of the data, velocity, variety, and veracity. The big data is being collected by almost any technological device that people use such as phones, tablets, and computers. The data is also being collected by play stations, GPS systems, ISP, movie rental sites, banking systems, hospital systems, and almost any other entity that interacts with consumers. With all these systems being used for data collection, the relevance to caravan exchange is that it needs to have the capabilities that will be effective in the collection of data for use in improving customer experiences.
Why is the Data Being Collected?
The reason for the collection of the data is to know what the customer needs before he even knows he needs it. Big data matters to every business that interacts with customers and having the needed information can help improve customer service and the customer experience. It is important for target marketing that enables the ability to send catalogs to the customer for the merchandise that he or she typically purchases. Further, it also enables sending advertisements on TV channels in line with the customer’s needs. Caravan exchange needs to be involved in collection and use of big data to ensure that it delivers services and products aligned to the customers’ needs. As an example, the business can have the ability to identify what type of caravan the customer need and for how long he or she will need the caravan.
To Whom Does It Matter?
Big data matters to every enterprise that interacts with the customer, including insurance companies and government agencies that need to collect data on fraud. Customer experience is one of the areas that is largely affected by big data since gaining a perspective on the customer can help in improving the customer experience. With the right information, businesses have the ability to improve customer interactions. Big data also matters in healthcare where the information can be used to extract clinically relevant information that reduces costs and improves patient care. Big data is also relevant for caravan exchange that can use it to gain a perspective on the consumer needs as regards caravan needs as well as the best approach to ensure effective customer service that drives a positive customer experience. Such will help in ensuring competitiveness and business relevance.
References
Kutchuni.edu. (2016). Bid data issue and challenge. Retrieved from http://cs.kutchuni.edu.in/blog/?p=70
Snepenger, J. (2007). Marketing research for entrepreneurs and small business managers. Retrieved from http://msucommunitydevelopment.org/pubs/mt9013.pdf
Uhl, A., and Gollenia, A. (2016). Digital enterprise transformation. London: Routledge.
Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount
A practice change intervention is a deliberate and systematic effort to implement a new or improved clinical practice within a healthcare setting. It involves identifying areas for improvement, designing a strategy for change, implementing the strategy, and evaluating its effectiveness. A successful practice change intervention requires careful planning, execution, and monitoring.
There are several steps involved in a practice change intervention:
Identify the need for change: This step involves identifying the areas of practice that require improvement, such as patient safety, quality of care, or efficiency. This can be done through various methods, such as surveys, audits, or benchmarking.
Define the problem: Once the need for change has been identified, the problem needs to be clearly defined. This involves specifying the gap between the current practice and the desired practice, identifying the root cause of the problem, and developing a clear and concise problem statement.
Develop a strategy for change: This step involves developing a plan for implementing the new or improved practice. The plan should include clear objectives, a timeline, and a required resource description.
Implement the strategy: This step involves executing the change plan, which may include training staff, changing policies and procedures, or introducing new technology.
Monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the change: This step involves monitoring the implementation of the change and evaluating its effectiveness. This may involve collecting data on patient outcomes, staff satisfaction, or other relevant metrics. The evaluation results should be used to refine the intervention and make further improvements.
Effective practice change interventions require strong leadership, effective communication, and a culture of continuous improvement. It is important to involve all stakeholders, including patients, healthcare providers, and administrators, in the change process to ensure buy-in and support for the new practice. By following a structured approach, healthcare organizations can successfully implement practice change interventions and improve patient outcomes, quality of care, and efficiency.
Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount
Monitoring and evaluation is a tool that is used to assess performance and achieve the set goals of a particular project. The assessment focuses on the present and future management of the outcomes of any project. Monitoring and evaluation, therefore, helps to a great extent to clearly demonstrate the status of a project and thus aid in maintaining the focus of such a project by informing on the general progress of the project. Monitoring and evaluation tools are important for they help improve project rollout as well as ensure better utilization of available fund.
Evaluation for the Campaign for Sustainable Rural Livelihoods is a report which was published by Oxfam, a non-profit firm which operates across several countries of the world (Oxfam, 2013). This report is quite appealing since it has shown the evaluation of its program on rural sustainable livelihoods where it is documented that it has influenced the climate change policy. Climate change is one of the leading factors which have influenced livelihoods in as far as food security and sustainability is concerned (Oxfam, 2013). This report is appealing since it touches on a very crucial topic which is the world’s concern. It, therefore, shows that the program that was rolled out clearly helps to sustain the impacts created by climate change.
Adam Smith International Policy, Planning and Monitoring & Evaluation report are quite appealing and informative. The report seeks to report on policy planning in the education sector (Adam Smith International, 2019). The report notes that the education sector does not put into consideration the monitoring and evaluation as this is the only way to ensure that the policy and programs which are being implemented are up to standard and are sustainable for a longer span of time. The monitoring and evaluation strategies which are proposed by this report include the inclusion of a rigorous monitoring framework, management information systems, building capacity among other monitoring strategies which are aimed at improving monitoring and evaluation of education policies and programs. This is intended to ensure that there is sustainability in the sector that will see the allocation of limited resources and realize the results and intended outcomes.
Besides the education sector policy monitoring and evaluation, the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs on 31st May 2016 reported on the review of Disability rights in Cambodia (Australian Government, 2016). The review is a joint UN program which brings UNDP, UNICEF and WHO together. The report is therefore appealing since it focuses on the assessment of the program that seeks to create more opportunities for the people with disability. The findings, therefore, are the outcome of the status of the program and thus help in refocusing of the remainder tenure. In its entirety, the initiative is aimed at ensuring that people living with disability are given equal access to opportunities and thus this bring fairness as they are outcompeted and neglected in other sectors where opportunities are very competitive.
Finally, the report on monitoring and evaluation on Global HIV/AIDS by CDC as published in its website in 2012 is impressive and informative since it gives the update on the commitment of the United States in combating HIV/AIDS (CDC, 2012). This is because the report documents the activities in which CDC and the United States at large have undertaken including the provision of technical assistance on planning and reporting, processing outcomes and implementation of planning and reporting systems.
Conclusively these reports are focused on the Monitoring and Evaluation as a tool and how it has been used as a tool to aid in the management of the projects, programs, and their outcomes. Depending on how the M& E has been used in various aspects, it is clear that M&E is very crucial and very useful in the management of any project as it provides reports on the status of such a project and thus helps in an amendment or refocusing to ensure that the goals are attained.
References
Adam Smith International. Policy, Planning and Monitoring & Evaluation. Retrieved from https://www.adamsmithinternational.com/our-services/education-development/policy-planning-and-monitoring-Evaluation
Australian Government. (2016). Disability Rights Initiative Cambodia: Mid-Term Review Report and Management Response. Retrieved from https://dfat.gov.au/about-us/publications/Pages/cambodia-disability-rights-initiative-mtr-2016.aspx
CDC. (2012). Global HIV/AIDS: Monitoring and Evaluation. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/globalaids/what-cdc-is-doing/monitoring-and-evaluation.html
Oxfam (2013). Evaluation for the Campaign for Sustainable Rural Livelihoods. Retrieved from https://resources.oxfam.org.au/pages/view.php?ref=1417&search=%21collection128&order_by=relevance&sort=DESC&offset=0&archive=0&k=&curpos=5
Education for Ethnic Minority Children in Cambodia. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.care.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Impact-Brief_Education-for-Ethnic-Minority-Children-in-Cambodia.pdf
Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount
Forests do not only provide essential ecological services to humans, animals and plants but they also play a critical role in the economy of the world. The European forestry sector is one of the areas that contribute significantly to economic growth by forming 9% of the European manufacturing sector GDP.[1] Continuous demand for a reliable source and supply of raw materials by forest-based industries in Europe and use of wood for energy purposes comes with significant environmental, financial and institutional cost. Additionally, the need to converse biodiversity, mitigate climate change and sustain forests as important sources of water, medicines, ambient environment for leisure and recreation and space for carbon sink call for effective polices to balance maintenance of forests and use of forest resources for economic production.
This study aim aims to draw a comparison between the predictions provided in the European Forest Sector Outlook Study II (EFSOS II) with actual development of different indicators that define actual outlook of the sector in each of the states. This study will look into various scenarios presented in the EFSOS II and determine whether the predictions in the EFSOS II study are still valid for about a decade now since the report was published in 2011. The EFSOS II 2011 focused on the need to strike a balance between demand for wood and sustainable use of forest resources to mitigate climate change, promote diversity, sustainability and right levels renewable energy sources.[2] This current study will establish whether the projections indicated in the EFSOS II report have been meet and whether the same challenges identified in the report are impeding achievement of sustainability in actual states.
The European Forest Sector Outlook Study II (EFSOS II) 2011 is a report by the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (FOREST EUROPE), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) that maps out developments in the European Forestry sector by studying past trends in an attempt to promote evidence-based policy formulation and decision making for policy makers. The aim of the European Forest Sector Outlook Study II (EFSOS II) 2011 is to provide policy makers with insights intended to help them understand the likely consequences of certain policy choices in matters related to forest sustainability.[3] The study proposes choices based on their sustainability and encourages policy makers to reflect on the sustainability analysis when taking their future policy actions. The study focused on factors relating to forest resources such as area, increment, harvest and silviculture in relation to consumption of forest products between 2010 and 2030. The study established that policy makers in their attempt to implement policies that would support sustainable forest use are faced with a wide range of challenges including the challenge to mitigate climate change, reaching targets for renewable energy, adapting to climate changing, protecting biodiversity, achieving sustainability and appropriate policies for supporting sustainable forest use.[4]
Unlike other studies that evaluated forest resource projections using the traditional wood resource modeling tools, the EFSOS II uses modeling tools that provide indicators on sequestration, biodiversity and recreational value of forests. The models used indicated that consumption of forest products and wood energy is increasing rapidly and the supply of this resource will have to expand for it to meet the expanding demand. Additionally, the report indicated that for the European forestry sector to contribute towards climate change, policy makers should focus on forest management policies that emphasizes on carbon accumulation in the forest coupled with steady flow of wood for products and energy use.[5] Regular harvesting is perceived as the only potential for limiting carbon accumulation by storing the carbon in the harvested wood and prevents carbon emissions from the non-renewable materials. Similarly, the study established that for renewable energy to reach to reach the targeted levels, wood supply will need to increase by 50% in the next 20 years. Additionally, efficiency in wood use through installation of necessary fitters in the burning system to prevent emission is critical in reducing demand for wood.
The report identifies the need to maximize forest sector contribution towards climate change by implementing policies that promote optimum combination of carbon sequestration and storage with substitution to monitor trends and implement necessary adjustments. The report also identifies the need to strike a balance between wood energy and wood supply by using scientific knowledge to determine the right levels of forest extraction and sustainable forest use.[6] Additionally, the report recommends short rotation coppice, wood mobilization and protection of biodiversity by implementing strategies that combine promotion of diversity, wood supply and carbon sequestration.
In previous study, EFSOS II used scenarios comparing GDP growth rates, prices of main forestry products, production levels and net trade with actual development for the period 2000-2005. The report concluded that the scenarios in the European forestry sector were in line with the actual trends in prices, production and consumption hence making the report critical for use by the policy makers. Similarly, EFSOS II used reference scenario and four policy scenarios (maximizing biomass carbon, priority to diversity, promoting wood energy and fostering innovation and competitiveness) to explore forest resource and forest products in Europe in period between 2010 and 2030.[7] Several modeling tools were used to develop the scenarios and established that the European forest sector has become increasingly ecologically and socially sustainable.
Objective and Scope of the study
The main objective of this study is to analyze the actual developments in the European forestry sector between 2010 and 2019 and compare the results against the predictions provided in the EFSOS II report. Additionally, the study objective is to provide an up-to-date knowledge regarding the European forestry sector by focusing on demand and use of the forest resources against the need to mitigate climate change, produce sustainable renewable energy and protect biodiversity. The study scope is based on the variables developed in the EFSOS II report. While the EFSOS II scope was wide, this study opted for the variables that were most important to the scenarios present in the European forestry sector. The variables considered for comparison include
Consumption of forest resources
Growth of the forest resource based on (Area of forest, FAWS, FNAWS, growing stock, increment and fellings)
Maximizing biomass carbon.
Promoting biodiversity.
Fostering innovation and competiveness.
Sustainable renewable energy.
Methodology
This study adopted a social empirical method involving analysis of each of the European state as indicated by the EFSOS II 2011 grouping. The analysis of each country is intended to support the projections from of each of the country and compare the results based on the results from the EFSOS II report. Publically available data from each of the country was utilized and compared based on the variables indicated in the EFSOS II 2011 report. The data available was considered critical in enhancing the reliability of the results. Based on the EFSOS II report, countries were grouped into Eastern Europe, Western Europe and CIS sub-region and data available was summed by each region.[8]
Results
Structure of the EFSOS II report
The EFSOS II report is structured into five main sections. The first section provides an overview of the European forestry sector in the period around 2010. The first section identifies the main six policy issues that affect the policy makers in their attempt to make policies that support sustainable use of forest resources in Europe. The policy issues identified include mitigating climate change, right levels of renewable energy, adapting to the challenge of climate change, protecting biodiversity, achieving sustainability, developing competitive forest products and developing appropriate policies. The second section provides a reference scenario and the policy scenario and the assumptions on which the policy issues are based. The third section analysis each of the scenarios developed and assess the sustainability of each of the scenarios by providing estimation of sustainability based on particular projections. The fourth section provides an analysis of the main policy issues based on the scenarios results while the fifth section provides a conclusion and policy recommendations.[9]
Notably, EFSOS II is based on construction and interpretation of scenarios. The scenarios demonstrate what is known about the present and the past and offers insights on the series of possible futures. Therefore, it becomes possible to establish the consequences of certain define choices in the forestry sector. Relationships are drawn between external drivers of different situations in the as economic growth, population, climate and how they influence consumption of forest products and removal of products from forest. The section of a scenario is informed by its robustness and realism in relation to the trends and outlook of results from specific policy choices. The scenarios are developed based on a wide range of approaches and models. The strengths and weaknesses of each of the models are considered.
Methodological Approach
As aforementioned, the scenario analysis in EFSOS II are developed using a range of models that cover certain aspects in the forestry sector. The criteria for selection of the models revolve around robustness; transparency; ability to provide analysis at the country level within Europe; being based on validated data sets; and, the ability to address the stated policy challenges. Below is analysis of the models used to develop the scenario policy issues that were used in the EFSOS II study?
Econometric Projections of Production and Consumption of Forest Products
Projections based on econometric analysis are based on the relationships between economic development and activity in the forest sector. The results from the relationship between the two aspects help to provide a projection of future activity by painting a picture of how economic development and growth would impact use of forest resources and sustainability of the forest use.[10] This method was also applied in the previous EFSOS.[11] Through this method, projections relating to consumption, production and trade of forest products are developed. Products analyzed are sawn wood, wood-based panels, paper and paperboard. However, it is difficult to project wood energy using the econometric analysis since historical time series available were short. Projections based on econometric analysis are only valid in the event that the relationships observed will historically remain the same in the future. It also requires an exogenous assumption about developments for prices and costs.
Wood Resource Balance
The other model that was used in the EFSOS II study was Wood Resource Balance (WRB) that involves measuring the supply and use of all woody biomass streams for a given spatial unit (country or region).[12] On the left-hand side of the balance are sources of woody biomass; of both primary and secondary origin while on the right-hand side are the uses of woody biomass. Four main components including supply of wood from forestry sources, supply of other woody biomass, uses of wooden materials for products and use as a source of energy are used in WRB. Through the different WRB components, it is possible to establish real woody biomass balance for a given year or the discrepancies between potential future supply and expected future demand. However, WRB estimates are derived from outside the balance and it is therefore, difficult to establish discrepancy between potential supply and expected demand can be solved.
European Forest Information Scenario model
The European Forest Information Scenario model (EFISCEN) is based on large scale assessment of the forest resource. The EFISCEN model projects the future state of the forest based on the aspects of wood demand and management regime of wood resource. Aggregated forest inventory data from forestry agencies is used in the model.[13] Age-dependent increment functions are also derived from the same data. The model also uses the aspect of soil model YASSO to estimate soil carbon stocks and rate of carbon sequestration. Important variables such as distribution; felling, age class distribution; growing stock level; and, carbon sequestered in biomass and soil.
The Global Forest Sector Model
The Global Forest Sector Model (EFI-GTM) on the other hand focuses on forest products and makes projections of global consumption, production and trade of forest products, in response to assumed changes in external factors such as: economic growth; energy prices; trade regulations; transport costs; exchange rates; availability of forest resources; and, consumer preferences.
Competitiveness Analysis
The CMS model provides an overview of competitiveness in international markets, by comparing the exports of a specific country to the world exports. CMS is based on the assumption that a country’s export to the global market remains constant for a certain period of time. Changes in a country’s export growth are attributed to the level of competiveness. EFSOS II competitive analysis was based on four aspects that differentiate export growth including the world growth effect, the commodity-composition effect, the market-distribution effect and a residual effect. The CMS analysis requires bilateral trade data in monetary values and was gotten from the UN Commodity Trade Statistics Database.
The EFSOS II took advantage of the strengths of the various models to prevent the research from being undermined by their weaknesses. However, the core methodological approach used in the study is the wood balance model (WRB). However, the components of the WRB were projected separately without considering the possible interactions between them. The models were used to complement the WRB model for various aspects that were needed to give clear projections of the European forestry sector. For instance, the econometric analysis was used derive demand for material as driven by the scenario assumptions on future GDP development. Similarly, EFISCEN model was used to derive projections on potential wood supply from the forest based on the availability of the forest resource and the management regimes that are applied across Europe. The demand for forest resource for energy use was calculated by taking based on the existing trends and policies that set targets for renewable energy. The EFI-GTM model was used to establish how the resources are preferentially used and how the market can solve the discrepancy between the demand and supply. EFISCEN was also used to determine the real demand and harvest of residues and their consequences on forest resource. The competitiveness analysis was used to determine the trends in the competitiveness scenarios.
When using the EFI-GTM model, the EFSOS projected that the consumption for wood products would increase from 739 million m3 roundwood equivalent in 2010 to 853 million m3 in 2030.[14] Similarly, wood energy consumption in the same period will grow by more than 1.5% per year leading to an increase from 434 million m3 demanded in 2010 to 585 million m3 in 2030.
The report also indicates that the development of forest resource stood at 204.9 million in 2010 whereby, 166.7 million ha are utilized for wood supply[15]. The report projected that the total area under forest in EFSOS region will be 216.9 million ha by 2030 whereby, 171.1 million ha will be meant for wood supply.[16] That indicated that forest resource in Europe would increase a rate of 0.6 million ha per year. Similarly, forest not for wood supply is also projected to grow faster than forest for wood supply due to efforts made towards biodiversity conservation. Additionally, efforts to mitigate climate change would lead to 11% increase in forest cover by 2030.
When using EFISCEN model to establish how the demand for wood products and energy can be fulfilled, the EFSOS II report indicated that removals increase by 15% in 2030 would required as compared to 2010. The report project that 750 million m3 of stem wood would be required to removed annually to from the forests to ensure sustainable supply of wood. Therefore, this would require that countries in Europe implement harvest residue extraction, based on the current practice and guidelines of the most advanced countries. Demand for wood in 2030 is projected to be 20% higher than the situation in 2010. Each year the demand is projected to grow by 1.5%.[17] However, there will be a balance between supply and demand at less than 1% by 2030 which indicates that there would be no wood wastage. That means that sustainability levels in Europe are moving towards the right direction.
The EFSOS II report also indicates that for energy efficiency and renewable energy levels to be achieved, wood supply would have to increase by nearly 50% by 2030. However, mobilization of high volumes of wood would be needed thus creating a significant environmental, financial and institutional cost. Therefore, strong political goodwill is needed to modify framework for wood supply. Such high extraction of wood from forests would impact negatively soil carbon and water holding capacity and biodiversity in the forests. Additionally, forests would be less attractive for leisure and recreational activities. For wood supply to meet demand for wood for products and energy use, the supply of wood should be at 1.4 billion m3 in 2030 to meet similar demand. Assuming medium productivity, 5 million ha of forest would be needed every year to produce extra 100 million m3 of wood needed to strike a balance between demand for wood for energy use and supply of wood in effort to establish sustainable renewable energy.[18] The report also indicates that the shortfall of wood supply can be counter-balanced by establishing intensive cultivation of trees/grass to produce 4-12 tonnes of dry matter/ha/yr. Moreover, 16million ha new forests would be needed to replace 270 million m3 of harvest residues/stumps in a bid to achieve sustainable supply of wood for energy use.[19] That means that a six fold increase would be needed in wood supply as well as in non-forest wood sources to reach the reasonable energy potential. About 40% of renewable energy is projected by 2030. However, for the targets to be achieved two conditions have to be met. Efficiency in use of wood and increase in sources of renewable energy other than wood would be required to ensure wood energy sustainability.
The EFSOS II report also indicates that promoting biodiversity is a challenge for the European forestry sector. According to the report, if biodiversity was to be given a priority, wood supply from the European forests would have to reduce by 12% thus necessitating a reduction in consumption of wood products and energy use. The EFSOS report also projects that the average carbon sink in the forests in the period between 2010-2030 will be 0.67 tonnes C/ha/yr which indicates a 64% increase than the situation in2010. Additionally, the report indicates that lengthening rotations and increasing the share of thinning in harvest would promote an average biomass carbon per has of 5 tonnes/ha (6.7%) the situation in 2010.
Discussion
The comparison between the projected developments in EFSOS II report and the actual developments indicate significant similarities and differences in equal measures. To begin, the EFSOS report projected that the demand for wood products would increase from 739 million m3 round wood equivalent in 2010 to 853 million m3 in 2030.[20] Analysis of data from the Committee on Forests and Timber (2015) indicates that the level demand when compared to the EFSOS II estimates of demand indicates that the demand for rate for forest products is higher.[21] Data from the Forestry Commission indicates that demand for wood products will increase from around 800 Mm3 in 2010 to 1100 Mm3 in 2020 and 1370 Mm3 in 2030. Similarly, O’Brien and Bringezu contends that demand for wood products will grows by about 37% between 2010 and 2020 and by 71% between 2020 and 2030.[22] The difference between the two would be due to EFSOS scenarios being modified based on the country data while O’Brien and Bringezu depicts all the countries comprehensively. On the other hand, data from the EFSOS indicated that would consumption for energy use would increase from 434 million m3 demanded in 2010 to 585 million m3 in 2030.[23] Current data indicates that a 1% increase in demand for wood for energy use is recorded every year in Europe.[24]
Similarly, EFSOS II report had indicated that 50% increase in supply of wood would be needed to meet the demand for energy use by 2030. Warman indicates that between 2010 and 2014 demand for wood for energy use triggered an 11-16% increase in harvest of wood from forests. The EFSOS estimated that residual removal of 750 million m3 of stemwood would be required to create a 15% increase in the supply capacity of wood for product and energy use in Europe. However, current data indicate that the supply capacity can only increase by 10% in the same. Stricter environmental regulations are challenging removal of residue as removal is perceived to cause major nutrient losses.[25] Failure to remove have residues removed is likely to hamper efforts to have the level of wood needed to meet renewable energy targets in the EU. EFSOS proposed the need to promote energy efficiency, cascading use and integration of other sources of renewable sources of energy other than wood to achieve sustainable renewable energy. Subsequently, according to data from Forest Europe, there have been significant efforts to improve efficiency in wood use and to adopt renewable sources of energy such as solar energy. However, the EU wood consumption exceeds the global consumption levels in by a factor of 1.8 to 2.6 under comparable economic developments.[26] Therefore, it is possible that policies that would support a moderate demand and promote sustainable harvesting of wood for product and energy use have not been implemented. The risk of wood consumption surpassing the level of supply is higher than ever before in light of the need to protect diversity and mitigate climate change in Europe.
Figure 1. Data on wood removal
Source: Committee on Forests and Timber
Global production of wood products in 2016 totaled 467 million m3 of sawn wood, 415 million m3 of wood-based panels and 409 million tonnes of paper & paperboard.[27] Europe consumed around one quarter (24%) of all sawn wood, around two fifths (19%) of the world’s wood-based panels and around one quarter (23%) of all paper and paperboard in 2016.[28] In 2015, 578 million m3 of wood were removed from the European forest while another 595 was removed in 2016 for industrial round wood.[29] In the same period, wood fuel accounted for 157million removal of trees from the forest in 2015 and 2016 respectively.[30] In total, the amount of round wood removed from the European forests in 2015 and 2016 for industrial and energy use was 739 million m3 and 751 million m3 respectively.[31] According to the EFSOS II projections, the figure would increase from 739 million m3 in 2010 to around 800 million m3 in 2030. According to the 2015 and 2016 figures, the rate of increase is within the range projected by the EFSOS II report which indicates a about a 1% increase in consumption of wood for product and energy use in every year.
On the other hand, EFSOS II projected a 0.67 tonnes C/ha/yr carbon forest sink between 2010 and 2030. Current data indicates that the level of forest carbon stock increased from 4. 44 billion tones to 4.5billion tonnes which reflect a more than 1 % increase.[32] Increase in the total area under forest and increase in forest stock is attributed to the increased level of carbon stock. Considerable emphasis is put on carbon sequestration by forests and wood products and the adaptation of forests to climate change impacts. The vital role of forests in reducing GHG emissions and in mitigating and adapting to climate change has become critical in generation of policies that in the forestry sector.
Efforts to promote biodiversity have been established to affect the wood supply negatively as the need to protect certain species of trees affects the balance between supply and demand. According to EEA Report, the area of Europe’s forests designated for biodiversity and landscape protection has increased significantly over the years since 2010 by almost half a million ha from 9% to about 10%. About 87% of the forests in the European forests are classified as semi-natural while over 70% of the forests are regenerated naturally to promote diversity.[33] Most European forests are under a management plan or an equivalent (3.5), which typically includes management of the biodiversity of the forest in question.
Summary
The study has accumulated evidence that demand for wood for product and energy use has been on a high increase than previously thought. The increased demand for wood is significantly influencing policy instruments in the face of growing concerns to mitigate climate change, promote biodiversity and achieve sustainable levels of renewable energy.
Despite the increased demand for wood, the European forest sector is increasing significantly in an attempt to strike a balance between demand and supply of wood. The forest cover in the Europe has increased by close to half a million ha thus helping to contain the level of demand. Additionally, increased efforts involving increasing efficiency and adoption of more sources of non-forest renewable energy have been made across Europe to increase energy sustainability. The interplay between supplies, demand, needs to promote biodiversity, achieve renewable energy sustainability and the right level of forest carbon stock is significantly affecting policy maker’s decisions in Europe. However, the overall status of the Europe forestry sector is moving to the direction of sustainability.
Bibliography
Arets, E. J. M. M., T. Palosuo, A. Moiseyev, G. J. Nabuurs, D. Slimani, C. Olsmat, J. Laurijssen, B. Mason, D. McGowan, and D. Vötter. Reference futures and scenarios for the European forestry wood chain. EFORWOOD, 2008.
Baranzelli, Claudia, Chris Jacobs-Crisioni, F. Batista e Silva, C. Perpiña Castillo, Ana Barbosa, J. Arevalo Torres, and Carlo Lavalle. “The Reference scenario in the LUISA platform–Updated configuration 2014.” Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. doi 10, no. 2788 (2014): 85104.
EEA Report No 5/2016. “EEA Report European forest Ecosystems State and trends” European Environmental Agency. 2016
Edwards, David, Frank Søndergaard Jensen, Mariella Marzano, Bill Mason, Stefania Pizzirani, and Mart-Jan Schelhaas. “A theoretical framework to assess the impacts of forest management on the recreational value of European forests.” Ecological Indicators 11, no. 1 (2011): 81-89.
Forestry Commission. “Forestry statistics 2018: International Forestry.” National Statistics. 2018.
Forest Europe (Organization). Liaison Unit Oslo. “State of Europe’s Forests, 2011: Status & Trends in Sustainable Forest Management in Europe.” Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, Forest Europe, Liaison Unit Oslo, 2011.
Forest Europe, “State of Europe’s forests 2015.” In Ministerial conference on the protection of forests in Europe, p. 314. 2015.
Grassi, Giacomo, and Roberto Pilli. “Projecting the EU forest carbon net emissions in line with the “continuation of forest management”: the JRC method.” Tech Rep (2017).
Jonsson, Ragnar, Viorel NB Blujdea, Giulia Fiorese, Roberto Pilli, Francesca Rinaldi, Claudia Baranzelli, and Andrea Camia. “Outlook of the European forest-based sector: forest growth, harvest demand, wood-product markets, and forest carbon dynamics implications.” iForest-Biogeosciences and Forestry 11, no. 2 (2018): 315.
Mantau, Udo, U. Saal, K. Prins, F. Steierer, M. Lindner, H. Verkerk, J. Eggers et al. “Real potential for changes in growth and use of EU forests.” Hamburg: EUwood, Methodology report (2010).
O’Brien, Meghan, and Stefan Bringezu. “Assessing the sustainability of EU timber consumption trends: comparing consumption scenarios with a safe operating space scenario for global and EU timber supply.” Land 6, no. 4 (2017): 84.
Rougieux, Paul. “Modelling European Forest Products Consumption and Trade in a Context of Structural Change.” PhD diss., Université de Lorraine, 2017.
Union Innovation. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Brussels, 2014.
Union européenne. Commission européenne, and EUROSTAT. Agriculture, forestry and fishery statistics. Publications office of the European Union, 2015.
UNECE, FAO. “The European Forest Sector. Outlook study II 2010-2030.” Septiembre, Ginebra (2011).
[1] Giacomo Grassi and Roberto Pilli, “Projecting the EU forest carbon net emissions in line with the “continuation of forest management”: the JRC method,” Tech Rep (2017)
[2] FAO UNECE, “The European Forest Sector. Outlook study II 2010-2030,” (Septiembre, Ginebra, 2011).
[4] Paul Rougieux, “Modelling European Forest Products Consumption and Trade in a Context of Structural Change,” PhD diss., (Université de Lorraine, 2017).
[5] Forest Europe, “State of Europe’s forests 2015,” In Ministerial conference on the protection of forests in Europe, p. 314.
[10] Arets, E. J. M. M., T. Palosuo, A. Moiseyev, G. J. Nabuurs, D. Slimani, C. Olsmat, J. Laurijssen, B. Mason, D. McGowan, and D. Vötter. Reference futures and scenarios for the European forestry wood chain. EFORWOOD, 2008
[12] Mantau, Udo, U. Saal, K. Prins, F. Steierer, M. Lindner, H. Verkerk, J. Eggers et al. “Real potential for changes in growth and use of EU forests.” Hamburg: EUwood, Methodology report (2010).
[13] Edwards, David, Frank Søndergaard Jensen, Mariella Marzano, Bill Mason, Stefania Pizzirani, and Mart-Jan Schelhaas. “A theoretical framework to assess the impacts of forest management on the recreational value of European forests.” Ecological Indicators 11, no. 1 (2011): 81-89
[22] O’Brien, Meghan, and Stefan Bringezu. “Assessing the sustainability of EU timber consumption trends: comparing consumption scenarios with a safe operating space scenario for global and EU timber supply.” Land 6, no. 4 (2017): 84
[24] Forest Europe, “State of Europe’s forests 2015.” In Ministerial conference on the protection of forests in Europe, p. 314. 2015.
[25] Grassi, Giacomo, and Roberto Pilli. “Projecting the EU forest carbon net emissions in line with the “continuation of forest management”: the JRC method.” Tech Rep (2017
[26] Jonsson, Ragnar, Viorel NB Blujdea, Giulia Fiorese, Roberto Pilli, Francesca Rinaldi, Claudia Baranzelli, and Andrea Camia. “Outlook of the European forest-based sector: forest growth, harvest demand, wood-product markets, and forest carbon dynamics implications.” iForest-Biogeosciences and Forestry 11, no. 2 (2018): 315.
[27] Paul Rougieux, “Modelling European Forest Products Consumption and Trade in a Context of Structural Change.” PhD diss., Université de Lorraine, 2017.
[28] Union européenne. Commission européenne, and EUROSTAT. Agriculture, forestry and fishery statistics. Publications office of the European Union, 2015.
[32] Union Innovation. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Brussels, 2014.
[33] Forest Europe (Organization). Liaison Unit Oslo. “State of Europe’s Forests, 2011: Status & Trends in Sustainable Forest Management in Europe.” Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, Forest Europe, Liaison Unit Oslo, 2011.
Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount
