|
Forest certification has appeared over the past decade as
a mechanism to link producers who manage their forest with
high environmental and social standards with customers for
such products. Forest certification involves the voluntary,
independent, third-party (certifier) verification of the quality
of forest management in relation to a set of predetermined
requirements (the standard). A certificate for forest management
is usually accompanied by a verification of the "Chain
of Custody", which enables to trace back timber products
from the market to the place of production. With some certification
schemes (e.g., FSC, Pan European Forest Certification PEFC
but not ISO), producers are allowed to put a label on certified
forest products which allows customers to distinguish certified
from non-certified timber.
Several aims and expectations are cited by the various stakeholders
of sustainable forest management that influence their decision
to embark on certification (taken from Bass)
- improve forest management, and enhance multiple values
from forests
- improve mechanisms for producer accountability;
- challenge policy/legal frameworks and improve government
roles; and
- reduce government's forest monitoring burdens, by bringing
in independent certifiers.
- maintain or improve market access/share
- obtain a price premium for certified products;
- obtain or defend the producer's access to forests, resources,
and capital
- reduce the producer's environmental and social risk; and
- improve the awareness, skills or morale of staff and shareholders.
Two general approaches exist towards certification. Performance-based
standards are used to evaluate whether the managed forests
meet economic, ecological and social performance measures
specified in the standard. These standards focus on the result
of forest management, and to a lesser extent on how this is
achieved. The FSC standard is an example of a performance-based
standard System-based standards (or environmental management
systems) are used to evaluate whether the management systems
are in place that allow forest managers to achieve and review
targets they have set. System-based standards therefore focus
on process rather than on outcome. The ISO 14000 series is
an example of an environmental management system. Performance
standards that are used are essentially similar to the ones
described in (#standards of sustainable forest management).
They document the technical requirements of forest management,
and, critically, they are developed by stakeholder participation.
FSC has published a generic standard of Principles and Criteria
which applies worldwide, but which needs to be extended with
locally relevant indicators. Many countries don't have an
FSC-endorsed national standard, and in that case the criteria
are developed by the accredited certifiers who conduct the
actual certification.
Several certification schemes for forest products exist,
although most of them are primarily active in temperate and
boreal forests (PEFC, CSA, SFI). The best-known scheme with
reputedly the highest requirements is the Forest Stewardship
Council (FSC). Although FSC also has (far) more certificates
and certified area in temperate forests than in the tropics,
there are quite a few certificates in the tropics as well.
ISO 14000 is also operating in the tropics, while PEFC has
recently started to proliferate into the tropics (Brazil,
Malaysia). Forest industries in Africa have taken the initiative
to develop a Pan African Certification Scheme based on the
African Timber Organisation and CIFOR C&I, but to date
no certificates have been issued. In addition to international
schemes, Malaysia (MTCC), Indonesia (LEI) and Costa Rica have
developed independent national certification schemes including
labelling. All of these schemes are involved in efforts for
mutual recognition, whereby one standards body or system recognises
and accepts other standards or certification schemes as substantively
equivalent in intent, outcome and process. PEFC itself is
a framework for the mutual recognition of credible national
or regional forest certification schemes of member countries.
Certification is not carried out by the standards body but
by independent accredited certifiers. In the case of FSC there
are 12 accredited
certification bodies , few of which are based in the tropics.
Certification takes off slowly in the tropics. In January
2002, only 8% of the total certified forest area by all schemes
was in the tropics, mostly in Central and South America and
barely any in Africa, and then mostly forest plantations.
Certification appears to have been taken up in countries and
enterprises where forest management is already good. In the
tropics, particularly the social component of sustainable
forest management appears to present the largest problems.
Regardless of this fact, forest certification is clearly gaining
foothold among consumers and producers. The area of certified
forests has increased exponentially, in many countries initiatives
are under way to develop national standards and certify forests
and the market share of certified timber in some countries
is rising (from 4% in 1999 to 7% in 2001, for FSC-certified
timber in the Netherlands, according to WWF). The main markets
for certified timber are the UK, Germany and the Netherlands,
followed by the US, Japan and France.
In spite of these successes certification remains one of
the most contentious issues in international forest policy.
Often-heard complaints are about the high costs of certification
while the markets benefits of certified timber remain uncertain,
the perceived loss of sovereignty to a private overseas certification
body and lack of relevance of the standard to local circumstances.
Some see certification as a technical barrier to trade, others
find the standards too strict and yet others too lax. To date,
certification of (tropical) timber is only important for that
small amount of timber that is traded internationally to environmentally
sensitive markets, so it does not improve management for the
vast amount of timber for other markets. Further, it is sometimes
stated that certification puts tropical operations at a disadvantage
compared with operations in developed countries, particularly
when they are small community-based operations in complex,
highly diversity multi-aged natural forests in countries with
a weak legal and institutional climate for forestry, rather
than in plantations or semi-natural, even-aged forests in
countries with strong forestry traditions. The answer to this
problem is to allow disadvantaged producers to obtain a certificate
while they are gradually improving their management, but this
"dilution" of standards draws much criticism. Finally,
FSC has been criticised for monopolising certification.
Partly in response to the proliferation of certification
schemes which are difficult to distinguish for customers,
and partly with a view to stimulate the development of competing
certification schemes, "gatekeeper" schemes have
been set up to verify whether timber that enters markets satisfies
the minimum requirements of that market. In the Netherlands,
the Keurhout Foundation has developed criteria and indicators
against which certified timber is evaluated, regardless of
the certifying body.
NTFP certification
Initially, certification focused mainly on timber, but certification
of non-timber forest products has recently received more attention.
The FSC allows usage of the FSC label on NTFP's from certified
forests since 1998, and a draft principle (Principle 11) for
NTFP is under discussion. Specific standards for management
of Brazil nuts have been developed for Bolivia. Products such
as palm heart have already been certified under the FSC in
Brazil.
For non-timber forest products, other forms of certification
is also possible. Organic certification focuses on agricultural
sustainability criteria such as the renunciation of synthetic
fertilisers and pesticides. This applies to many NTFP's and
these are increasingly commercialised as organic food products.
Organic certifiers are accredited by the International Organic
Accreditation Service (IOAS), established in 1997 by the International
Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements. To a limited
extent, fair trade certification schemes may also apply to
NTFP's.
|
TBI sources
 Lammerts
van Bueren, E.M. and Blom, E.M. (1997). Hierarchical
framework for the formulation of sustainable forest management
standards.
|
