文献类型：期刊文献

英文题名：Facing the complexities of the global timber trade regime: How do Chinese wood enterprises respond to international legality verification requirements, and what are the implications for regime effectiveness?

作者：Nathan, Iben[1] Chen, Jie[2] Hansen, Christian Pilegaard[1] Xu, Bin[2] Li, Yan[2]

第一作者：Nathan, Iben

通信作者：Nathan, I[1];Xu, B[2]

机构：[1]Univ Copenhagen, Dept Food & Resource Econ, Rolighedsvej 25, DK-1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark;[2]Chinese Acad Forestry, Res Inst Forestry Policy & Informat, Beijing 100091, Peoples R China

年份：2018

卷号：92

起止页码：169-180

外文期刊名：FOREST POLICY AND ECONOMICS

收录：;EI(收录号：20182005200057);Scopus(收录号：2-s2.0-85046802643);WOS:【SSCI(收录号:WOS:000435750000017)，SCI-EXPANDED(收录号:WOS:000435750000017)】；

基金：We are grateful to the Chinese enterprises who contributed to our survey with their time and responses; to the Chinese Academy of Forestry (CAF), who provided funds for the survey; and to CAF and the Department of Food and Resource Economics at the University of Copenhagen for enabling the research. An earlier draft of this paper was presented at the IUFRO 125th Anniversary Congress in Freiburg, Germany, 17 - 22 September 2017 at a panel on Policy Learning. We appreciate the comments from the participants in the panel. Finally, we thank for the detailed comments to earlier drafts of the paper received from two anonymous reviewers and from the Editor-in-Chief.

语种：英文

外文关键词：China; Legality verification; EUTR, Lacey Act amendment; Forest certification; Regime complexity

摘要：The emergence of transnational approaches to combat illegal logging and related trade through legality verification (LV) has spurred debate about the implications for the global timber trade regime. Scholars debate to what extent the various actors will support LV, and whether LV will undermine private forest certification and higher standards due to operators' venue shopping. This paper explores Chinese wood enterprises' responses and discusses the implications for regime effectiveness. Based on primary data from 158 questionnaires and secondary data we find that, although the majority of the sampled export-oriented Chinese companies have heard about LV requirements, only few have detailed knowledge. Furthermore, they look to their customers' different requirements, and therefore often apply multiple measures simultaneously rather than do venue shopping. The question whether LV will undermine standards and certification therefore to a high extent bounces back to customers and import authorities. On the other hand, the Chinese companies consider the complexities of the timber regime a major constraint for meeting customers' requirements and therefore for own uptake and support. There is hence a need to reduce complexity in order to ensure regime effectiveness. We suggest this is best achieved by increased transparency of and alignment between the various LV regulations.