The summary provided in table 5 shows that a one-unit exogenous increase in the demand for output from forestry and hunting directly benefits the rural non-poor disproportionately more than the other household sectors (rural poor, urban poor and urban non-poor). Table 5 further shows that exogenous increases in the demand for output from forestry and hunting have much larger direct impacts on the welfare of rural areas (rural poor and rural non-poor) compared to similar increases in the demand for output from the agriculture or the wood-paper printing sectors. To give a more practical interpretation to the multipliers reported in table 5, table 6 uses the approach of table 4 to demonstrate the magnitude of the direct effect.