The economic benefits of gambling may be offset by economic harm to other industries. This economic phenomenon, also known as substitution or cannibalization, refers to a new product that diverts consumption and profits from other products or industries. Gambling may displace revenue from other businesses, but economic impact studies on gambling do not consider such shifts between expenditures. This paper presents a systematic review of the available evidence (N = 118) on whether the introduction or expansion of gambling harms or benefits other business activity. Although the issue has been considered in previous review studies, no industry-level analysis is currently available. The results show that such an approach is necessary, as the impacts of gambling on other industries appear to depend strongly on the type of industry, as well as on the location and type of gambling. Industries that are negatively affected by gambling include other recreation, retail and merchandise, manufacturing, and agriculture and mining. Alcohol consumption, construction, and the finance, insurance, and real estate industries, as well as other services, appear to be positively affected by the presence of gambling. In other cases, the evidence is either mixed or inconclusive. These results nevertheless depend strongly on the type of gambling. Destination gambling appears to be more beneficial to other industries than recreational gambling. Overall, the results show that even in cases when gambling does substitute for other industries, the displacement is not complete. The reasons for this and the gaps in the existing evidence and literature are discussed.

Both the ever-increasing littering problem and climate change mitigation have driven towards to develop more sustainable packaging solutions for food. Thus, a sustainability of a food package is a complex issue and needs careful analysis in order to ensure the paramount, the food safety. The recent research has concentrated to find novel solutions to replace for instance plastics as a packaging material. So far there has been very little data about the used food packaging materials and their volumes, especially in product groups, not only as single items. This thesis analysed the single food items sold in the Finnish supermarkets, by categorising the data into product groups and analysing the obtained product data further. The analysis focused to identify product groups for possible packaging material substitution, especially single-use plastics (SUP). Pre-determined criteria were used to identify the most interesting product groups for further research. The criteria included (i) sufficient volumes, either in packaging material weight in grams or in sales share, (ii) the suitability of the polymer type for recycling, and (iii) the possible impact of the SUP directive. The EU’s SUP directive (Directive (EU) 2019/904) sets several restrictions for the SUP use also in the food packaging industry. Therefore, there is a need to substitute some of the most harmful packaging materials. In most cases the main driver for substitution is the environmental impacts, especially littering and its prevention. This thesis concentrates to find possibilities to diminish the littering problem from the packaging material perspective.

Forests play a central role in climate change mitigation actions, and substitution, that is the use of wood products in place of fossil intensive materials, has been recognized as a potential way to avoid emissions. While there are studies estimating the substitution impact of products, i.e., the avoided emissions, there is a lack of studies integrating market perspectives into substitution estimation. To contribute to this research gap, this study explores the market assumptions of substitution through the theoretical lenses of value chains and microeconomic theory on demand. The objectives are to recognize powerful decision-makers in the value chains, to establish a better understanding for the current state of substitution in the markets, and to explore the determinants of demand of the wood-based products. To limit the scope of this study, the use of pulp-based products was examined in the cases of packaging and textile sectors. Semi-structured interviews with 14 experts were arranged to discuss their views on substitution and demand of the pulp-based products in the chosen sectors. Additionally, a Likert scale was filled at the end of each interview to supplement the interview answers and enable elasticity and cross-price elasticity analyses to examine substitution. The sample of respondents was chosen through the use of snowball sampling and a matrix to recognize potential interviewees. First, the findings of this study suggest that in both sectors, the decision-making power on materials is held by the operators at the end of the value chain whereas the forest sector is located at the beginning of the chain. Second, in both sectors, there is willingness to find more sustainable material solutions, but the tools for this are lacking. In the case of packaging sector, the barrier capacities of plastic are unattainable with fiber-based materials, meaning that reducing plastic use does not always imply switching the feedstock itself. In the textile sector, the production of wood-based textile fibers is not yet scaled enough for it to compete with similar materials. However, the analysis of elasticities indicates that some substitution can be expected in both sectors. Third, a number of important determinants of demand were identified, yet no single factor could be identified as the most important one. This study concluded that there is room to improve the market assumptions for substitution impact estimation. In packages, the market preferences of fiber-based packaging in some uses give a rise for interpretational issues, while plastic reduction goals do not always imply switching to wood feedstock. In textiles, the new man-made cellulosic fibers (MMCFs) are expected to mostly substitute for viscose and fill the cellulosic gap from stagnating production of cotton instead of substituting for synthetic fibers. To conclude, it is central to integrate market data and concepts better into future substitution impact analyses to facilitate more realistic estimates.

Background: The building and construction sectors represent a major source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Replacing concrete and steel with wood is one potential strategy to decrease emissions. On product level, the difference in fossil emissions per functional unit can be quantified with displacement factors (DFs), i.e., the amount of fossil emission reduction achieved per unit of wood use when replacing a functionally equivalent product. We developed DFs for substitution cases representative of typical wood-frame and non-wood frame multi-story buildings in the Nordic countries, considering the expected decarbonization of the energy sector and increased recycling of construction products. Results: Most of the DFs were positive, implying lower fossil emissions, if wood construction is favored. However, variation in the DFs was substantial and negative DFs implying higher emissions were also detected. All DFs showed a decreasing trend, i.e., the GHG mitigation potential of wood construction significantly decreases under future decarbonization and increased recycling assumptions. If only the decarbonization of the energy sector was considered, the decrease was less dramatic compared to the isolated impact of the recycling of construction materials. The mitigation potential of wood construction appears to be the most sensitive to the GHG emissions of concrete, whereas the emissions of steel seem less influential, and the emissions of wood have only minor influence. Conclusions: The emission reduction due to the decarbonization of the energy sector and the recycling of construction materials is a favorable outcome but one that reduces the relative environmental benefit of wood construction, which ought to be considered in forest-based mitigation strategies. Broadening the system boundary is required to assess the overall substitution impacts of increased use of wood in construction, including biogenic carbon stock changes in forest ecosystems and in wood products over time, as well as price-mediated market responses.

Wood products may help to avoid fossil emissions when they substitute for more fossilintensive products. However, the estimates of avoided fossil emissions attributed to wood use tend to be based on incomplete market assumptions. Wood products are assumed to fully substitute for non-wood products, yet substitution rarely occurs 1:1 and wood products can also substitute for each other. This study outlines a systematic procedure grounded on economic theory for approximating the existence and rate of substitution between wood and non-wood products, and calculates the marginal avoided fossil emissions with both conventional assumptions and more realistic assumptions based on an expert survey, taking the case of textile markets. The results suggest that regenerated cellulosic fibers (RCFs) are not perfect substitutes for synthetic fibers, meaning that part of an additional RCF supply will replace established textile fibers while part of it merely adds to the overall textile supply, and thereby aggregate fossil emissions. Moreover, in the long term, RCFs are more likely to substitute for synthetics than for cotton, and in the short term, non-viscose RCFs are more likely to substitute for contemporary viscose than for polyester or cotton. In the specified case, the alteration of market assumptions leads to quadrupling the marginal substitution impacts of wood use. Besides the relatively high fossil intensity of con temporary viscose, this is partly explained by increased absolute aggregate fossil emissions. Producing a more realistic account of substitution processes in the forest products markets is central in directing investments that ensure a net reduction in fossil emissions.

Background: Replacing non-renewable materials and energy with wood offers a potential strategy to mitigate climate change if the net emissions of ecosystem and technosystem are reduced in a considered time period. Displacement factors (DFs) describe an emission reduction for a wood-based product or fuel which is used in place of a non-wood alternative. The aims of this review were to map and assess DFs from scientific literature and to provide findings on how to harmonise practices behind them and to support coherent application. Results: Most of the reviewed DFs were positive, implying decreasing fossil GHG emissions in the technosystem. The vast majority of the reviewed DFs describe avoided fossil emissions either both in processing and use of wood or only in the latter when wood processing emissions were considered separately. Some of the reviewed DFs included emissions avoided in post-use of harvested wood products (HWPs). Changes in forest and product carbon stocks were not included in DFs except in a few single cases. However, in most of the reviewed studies they were considered separately in a consistent way along with DFs. DFs for wood energy, construction and material substitution were widely available, whereas DFs for packaging products, chemicals and textiles were scarce. More than half of DFs were calculated by the authors of the reviewed articles while the rest of them were adopted from other articles. Conclusions: Most of the reviewed DFs describe the avoided fossil GHG emissions. These DFs may provide insights on the wood-based products with a potential to replace emissions intensive alternatives but they do not reveal the actual climate change mitigation effects of wood use. The way DFs should be applied and interpreted depends on what has been included in them. If the aim of DFs is to describe the overall climate effects of wood use, DFs should include all the relevant GHG flows, including changes in forest and HWP carbon stock and post-use of HWPs, however, based on this literature review this is not a common practice. DFs including only fossil emissions should be applied together with a coherent assessment of changes in forest and HWP carbon stocks, as was the case in most of the reviewed studies. To increase robustness and transparency and to decrease misuse, we recommend that system boundaries and other assumptions behind DFs should be clearly documented.