Sign up to our newsletter:

Forest certification – what does it mean for the world’s forests?

Volume 5 Number 1 - January 2008
Georgina Magin

In the past 15 years, forest certification has emerged as one of the key tools to improve forest management. But what exactly does certification involve and is it worth supporting?

The origins of certification

At its heart, certification consists of an independent assessment of forest management against pre-agreed standards, with or without a product claim element. The concept emerged in the 1990s following several decades of campaigning by environmental groups on the impact of logging. The “Save the Rainforest” and “Boycott Tropical Timber” campaigns of the 1970s and 1980s succeeded in raising awareness amongst consumers and putting pressure on the industry, creating the opportunity to use purchasing power positively to influence practices in the trade. To capitalise on this opportunity, a mechanism was needed to identify timber from genuinely well-managed sources and to reward “good” producers.

It was against this backdrop that a group of forward-looking timber producers, traders and environmentalists (including Fauna & Flora International - FFI) came together in the early 1990s to form the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). The mission of the FSC is to promote environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial and economically viable management of the world’s forests. It does this through certification of forest management units. Since its foundation, the FSC has developed into a global organisation with over 700 members and has certified more than 90 million hectares of forest in 70 countries.

As the FSC grew, other certification schemes have been formed and there are now national schemes in over 35 countries. Ironically, while certification was originally developed in part to address the confusion caused by the plethora of unsubstantiated claims about the source of forest products, the proliferation of certification schemes means that the dilemma has returned: what do the different schemes mean and which really do offer reassurance about the sustainability of wood and paper products?

FSC – the “gold standard” in forest certification

The FSC is widely regarded as the “gold standard” in certification. It remains one of only two certification schemes with a worldwide remit and is the only one that enjoys broad support from major environmental groups, including FFI, WWF and Greenpeace.

The FSC is designed to be inclusive, requiring a balanced participation of environmental, social and economic stakeholders in its decision-making. Transparency is also a key element in all its operations. The FSC has developed a global set of ten Principles and Criteria of Forest Stewardship (Table 1), from which national standards for forest management are developed in each country. Assessment of forest management against these standards is done by accredited certifying bodies; if a forest meets the required standard, a certificate is issued and timber originating from it can carry the FSC logo. Every link in the chain of custody from forest to shop is also assessed, to ensure the timber is segregated from non-certified timber at every stage. Strict rules govern the use of the FSC logo and accompanying claims to ensure the consumer is not misled.

The FSC has met with a fantastic response and demand for FSC certified products outstrips supply. Major retail chains such as B&Q in the UK and Home Depot in the USA are committed to stocking as much FSC as they can, and several governments have developed timber procurement policies that require them to seek certified products.

What other certification schemes are there?

Many of the other certification schemes that have been, or are being, developed are accredited under the umbrella organisation, the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification schemes (PEFC). The majority (18) of the 23 PEFC-endorsed schemes are European, but it also includes schemes in the USA (Sustainable Forestry Initiative - SFI), Canada (Canadian Standards Association - CSA), Brazil (Brazilian Program of Forest Certification - CERFLOR), Chile (CertforChile), and Australia (Australian Forest Certification Scheme). Together, PEFC schemes have certified almost 200 million hectares of forest. The Malaysian Timber Certification Council (MTCC), which is currently seeking recognition from PEFC, has certified 4.7 million hectares of forest, mostly in Peninsular Malaysia. Lembaga Ekolabel Indonesia (LEI), not currently associated with PEFC, certifies forest in Indonesia.

Which schemes are worth supporting?

The merits of different certification schemes have become a topic of significant debate. Several studies have been published (FERN, 2004; Meridian Institute, 2001; CPET, 2006; International Council of Forest and Paper Associations, 2007) as well as guides on how to assess schemes (WWF/World Bank, 2006; Nussbaum et al, 2002). Key differences between the schemes include the standards used to assess forest management, the process through which those standards are derived, transparency, stakeholder consultation, decision-making processes and balance of interests within the scheme.

According to the NGO FERN (the Forests and European Union Resource Network), the standards against which the forest management is assessed are one of the most important factors (FERN 2004). Standards can be performance-based, requiring a certain level of achievement in given aspects of management, or systems-based, where a system is required to be in place – for example, a biological monitoring system - but the results are not judged. FERN assessed eight certification systems and found that only the FSC used solely performance based standards and therefore was the only one that gave any real guarantees about the impact of logging operations in the forest.

Transparency is also a key issue, and some schemes (e.g. CERFLOR) do not routinely make certification reports or the standards used freely available to the public. The origin of the scheme and major influences (e.g. in standardsetting) is also important, with many schemes (FSC and CSA being notable exceptions) being dominated by industry interests.

Although the findings of comparative studies have varied, it remains the case that the FSC enjoys the broadest support from environmental and social groups. That said, questions have been raised about several FSC certificates which some environmentalists claim should not have been awarded. The FSC’s certification of large-scale industrial plantations has been controversial and has led to a review of FSC policy towards plantations. Currently, the issue of FSC certification in old-growth forests is hotly contested by a vocal group of campaigners.

What difference has certification made?

With forest certification now relatively well-established, its effectiveness in improving forest management is coming under scrutiny (Ozinga, 2004). Clearly, awarding a certificate to a forest unit does not in itself mean an improvement in management, and there is concern that the huge demand for certified forest products has led to some schemes simply certifying the status quo without any significant improvement on the ground.

Although a comprehensive analysis of the overall impact of certification is lacking, within individual certified forest management units positive effects on biodiversity and increased use of reduced impact practices can be seen. Benefits for land rights and workers rights have also been observed in some areas.

Although certification has had benefits in the management of northern forests, it has been a less effective tool in tackling the crisis of forest destruction and degradation in tropical forests. The vast majority of certified forest is in the northern hemisphere, notably North America and Europe (see Table 2), where arguably the problems of forest management are less acute than in the south. Of those certifications that have taken place in the south, a significant proportion are plantations and there is a marked shortage of certified natural tropical forest. While frustrating for tropical timber-users keen to specify certified timber, this probably reflects the reality on the ground – an International Tropical Timber Organisation (ITTO) report in 2006 estimated that only 5% of the total permanent forest estate in tropical countries is managed sustainably (ITTO, 2006).

The demand for certified products may provide an incentive for improved management in some of these key forest areas, but only if the certification scheme is sufficiently rigorous to require real change. In particular, certification has been criticised by some for not adequately addressing the issue of land tenure that is an underlying problem in many highly forested countries.

A further challenge is the huge and growing market for cheap wood products, particularly in emerging and rapidly developing economies. The existence of this massive, undiscerning demand means that there will always be an opportunity to sell wood products, no matter how they have been produced. Certification is not, therefore, the only answer and a broad range of measures are needed to safeguard the future of the world’s forests.

Another concern is that up-take of certification has been greatest in largescale industrial forestry units, and as a mechanism it may discriminate against small forest owners or communityowned enterprises who cannot afford the up-front costs of the process. The FSC has provisions for certification of small forests or woodlands, but they remain the minority of certified forests.

Certification and illegal logging

Certification is a voluntary, market-led initiative and it is not a substitute for good governance, sound regulatory frameworks and strong law enforcement. Illegal logging and trade in wood products is a major threat to forests in many parts of the world, undermining all efforts at sustainable forest management and undercutting the market for legally, sustainablysourced wood with cheaper alternatives. Certification may help in ensuring the legality of timber products, since most certification schemes require compliance with national laws. However, some suggest that since certification is not based on unannounced audits and relies on paper-based chain of custody systems, it may not be the most comprehensive solution to the illegal logging and trade problem (SGS, 2003). Specific intergovernmental programmes on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) and systems for the verification of legal origin are being developed and these can be regarded as complementary to certification, especially in countries where the problem of illegal logging is most severe.

FSC and the Global Trees Campaign

The Global Trees Campaign (GTC) is a joint initiative between FFI and BGCI aiming to take action for the world’s globally threatened trees and their habitats through provision of information, conservation action and support for sustainable use. FFI is a member of the FSC and seeks to contribute to development of its policies and practices. Through its partnership with the Mpingo Conservation Project, FFI and the Global Trees Campaign is working to achieve FSC certification of community-managed African Blackwood Dalbergia melanoxylon in Tanzania. Next year, as part of its SoundWood programme, the GTC hopes to support the development of an FSC Chain of Custody group for musical instrument makers. This will allow these generally small-scale enterprises to share the costs of chain of custody certification and produce FSC labelled instruments, including woodwinds made from certified African Blackwood.

Clearly, sustainable use is only one mechanism through which tree species can be conserved. The Global Trees Campaign is working on a range of projects using various strategies to improve the status of some of the world’s rarest and most threatened trees – further information can be found on www.globaltrees.org

Conclusion

Despite some shortcomings, it is clear that the emergence of certification, in particular the FSC, has been a positive force for the world’s forests. It has brought diverse stakeholders to the table to discuss sustainable forest management and has led to increased demand for timber products from well managed forests, thus creating an incentive for producers to improve their practices.

The FSC is the scheme that offers the best guarantees. Whether specifying timber for a construction project, buying outdoor furniture or sourcing products for a shop, botanic gardens can make a useful contribution by seeking to use FSC certified products whenever possible.

It is important to remember the limitations of certification, however, and to continue to support the diverse range of mechanisms and initiatives (such as the Global Trees Campaign) that are needed to improve the conservation and sustainable management of the word’s forests and tree species.

References

Georgina Magin
Global Trees Campaign Coordinator
Fauna & Flora International
4th Floor, Jupiter House, Station Road, Cambridge, CB1 2JD, UK.
Email: Georgina.Magin@faunaflora.org
Internet: www.globaltrees.org
http://www.fauna-flora.org