What the study found
Including forest carbon stock changes how China’s forestry productivity is measured, and ecological efficiency is reported as substantially higher than market efficiency. The study also finds that leaving forest carbon stock out can significantly underestimate green performance.
Why the authors say this matters
The authors say forest carbon stock is a structural determinant of forestry performance, and the findings indicate that measuring it helps correct long-standing biases in forestry productivity assessment. The study suggests this is relevant for ecological investment, region-specific management, and alignment with China’s dual-carbon goals, and it says the framework may be useful in other countries facing similar tradeoffs.
What the researchers tested
The researchers used provincial panel data from China covering 2000 to 2020. They assessed market and ecological efficiencies with a slack-based measure (SBM) and a non-radial directional distance function (NDDF), and they examined green total factor productivity (GTFP) and traditional total factor productivity (TFP) with a Meta-frontier Malmquist–Luenberger Productivity Index (MMLPI).
What worked and what didn't
Ecological efficiency was higher than market efficiency. GTFP grew about 1% per year, while traditional TFP grew about 11% per year, and the study reports pronounced regional differences linked to technology gaps and resource endowments. Excluding forest carbon stock led to significant underestimation of green performance.
What to keep in mind
The abstract does not describe detailed limitations beyond the study’s focus on China’s forestry sector and the 2000–2020 period. The results are based on provincial panel data and the specific efficiency and productivity models named in the abstract.
Key points
- Forest carbon stock was identified as a structural determinant of forestry performance.
- Ecological efficiency was reported to be substantially higher than market efficiency.
- Leaving forest carbon stock out significantly underestimated green performance.
- Green total factor productivity grew about 1% per year, versus about 11% for traditional total factor productivity.
- Regional differences were linked to technology gaps and resource endowments.
Disclosure
- Research title:
- Forest carbon stock changes China’s forestry productivity estimates
- Authors:
- Xia Jiang, Lanying Li
- Institutions:
- Zhejiang Shuren University, Zhejiang A & F University
- Publication date:
- 2026-01-29
- OpenAlex record:
- View
Get the weekly research newsletter
Stay current with peer-reviewed research without reading academic papers — one filtered digest, every Friday.