Sustainable Assets and Strategies Affecting the Forestry Household Income: Empirical Evidence from South Korea

Jang-Hwan Jo,Taewoo Roh,Yeo-Chang Youn,Seunguk Shin

doi:10.3390/su11133680

Abstract

This study aims to identify the factors determining the forestry household income in South Korea. An empirical analysis was conducted on the Korea Forest Service’s 3-year-panel data. Korea Forest Service is an institution responsible for the sustainable management of South Korea’s forest lands. In the study, the hypothesized factors determining the forestry household income are classified into four types of assets and three types of livelihood strategies. The forestry household income (FHI) is divided into three elements: forestry income (FI), non-forestry income (NFI), and transfer income (TI). The influence of household assets and livelihood strategies on each income were also assessed. A random effect model was used as a statistical analysis of the three-year data of 979 forestry households. Based on the analysis, we found that household head’s age, household head’s labor capacity, savings, business type, cultivated land size, and region are significantly associated with FHI. While FI was influenced by labor capacity, cultivated land size, business type, forestry business portfolio, and region, NFI was determined by household head’s age, household head’s gender, forestry business portfolio, and savings. TI was affected by household head’s age, household head’s education level, forestry business portfolio, savings, and region. The effect sizes and directions varied across different types of income (FHI, FI, NFI, and TI). The findings showed that South Korea forestry was highly dependent on sustainable assets and livelihood strategies. Based on our findings, we expect the effectiveness of forest policies in increasing the forestry household income would differ depending on the source of each income. The results of this study draw attention to the need for an income support policy which considers the characteristics of household assets and livelihood strategies in order to enhance FHI in South Korea.

Highlights

Forestry in South Korea is an industry based on the forest which covers 65% of the country’s land, playing significant roles in conserving biodiversity, maintaining the ecosystem, mitigating climate change, managing the land, and supporting local livelihoods in South Korea
We aim to answer the research questions, “What are the determinants of forestry household income (FHI) in South Korea?” and “How different are the determinants of different elements of household income?” Answering these questions should help us understand the forestry household’ livelihood structure and suggest a potential pathway to policy addressing the low contribution of forestry to FHI, providing policy directions for sustainable livelihood of forestry in South Korea
The results suggest that forestry income (FI) is affected by forestry business portfolio, business type, region, cultivated land size, and labor capacity

Summary

Introduction

Forestry in South Korea is an industry based on the forest which covers 65% of the country’s land, playing significant roles in conserving biodiversity, maintaining the ecosystem, mitigating climate change, managing the land, and supporting local livelihoods in South Korea. The income level of forestry household is at the lowest among the sectors in South Korea. It is at the level of 63.6% of the average urban household. The internal factors are household capitals, livelihood strategies, and livelihood outcome, while exogenous factors include social structures and processes [11]. Based on the capitals at hand of the household, a livelihood strategy is determined considering the quantity, quality, and composition of the capitals. The outcome of this livelihood strategy can be food production, cash income, and sustainable resource use, which enable re-investment in the household capitals. The exogenous components deal with environmental changes and institutional measures that directly affect the household’s asset availability and livelihood strategy [12]

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion