Forest Stewardship Council

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
FSC logo

The Forest Stewardship Council ( FSC ) is an international non-profit organization ( English stewardship , responsibility, administration office). The company based in Bonn was founded in 1993.

Although referred to as a non-profit organization, the company, which is registered as a GmbH in Germany, is not recognized as a non-profit organization and a. from license income for the FSC trademark in recent years average profits of approx. 1 million euros before taxes (with a turnover of 25.67 million euros), whereby the remuneration of the management with reference to § 286 para. 4 HGB is not to be published. The Council (college, council ; council assembly ) created the first system for certification of sustainable forestry , operates it and develops it further.

The term FSC is also used

  • for the FSC certification system
  • for the FSC mark (also known as the FSC logo, FSC certificate or FSC seal of approval ).

The latter identifies forest products as products of forest companies that are certified according to FSC criteria. In addition to wood, by-products of the forest such as resin, brushwood, berries or mushrooms can also be certified.

The FSC system for the certification of forestry was founded to ensure sustainable forest use ; this includes the maintenance and improvement of the economic, ecological and social functions of the forest operations. For this purpose, the FSC developed a general and transnational uniform standard, which consists of ten principles and criteria and which can only be applied if these ten are specified for a national level (see below).

In a broader sense, the certification of forest products to FSC also includes the product chain (chain of custody). A system was also created for this.

history

International

The Forest Stewardship Council goes back to an initiative of human rights organizations, environmental NGOs and a group of traders and industrial companies in 1990 in California . The initiative received decisive support at the environmental summit in Rio , at which the guiding principles of sustainable development were formulated as binding. There, however, it was not possible to agree on a legally binding instrument for the preservation or sustainable use of forests, although a factual 4-point plan for the implementation of sustainable forestry was formulated in Chapter 11 of Agenda 21 . Because of the unsatisfactory results in the protection of forests from the point of view of major international environmental protection organizations such as Greenpeace or WWF , the idea of ​​the FSC was considered suitable for contributing to better forest management . The development of the organization FSC is largely based on the commitment of WWF, Greenpeace, trade unions and representatives of indigenous peoples who identified common interests.

In October 1993 the founding meeting of the FSC took place in Toronto / Canada . By the middle of 1994, following the establishment of an office in Oaxaca / Mexico, the international standards and statutes of the organization were developed, which were approved by the general assembly in the summer of 1994. The association was finally registered in Oaxaca in February 1996. In January 2003 the headquarters of FSC International were relocated to Bonn / Germany .

Although some representatives of the forestry or timber industry supported the ideas of the FSC from the beginning, it became apparent in the mid-1990s that in many places the affected forestry companies in particular rejected them for various reasons. This not only includes state or municipal forest administrations in Germany.

Forestry companies and administrations in different countries and regions developed their own certification systems, which as a rule still compete with the FSC today. Two markets are to be considered: Certification institutions compete for certification customers (e.g. forest companies); the certificate competes with other certificates, seals of approval or similar for reputation and recognition among decision-makers and customers who buy non-certified products. This is how the Program for Endorsement of Forest Certification Schemes (PEFC) was created in Europe .

Today the FSC has more than 1000 members internationally. To date (June 2020), 211,519,496 hectares of forest are certified worldwide according to the principles and criteria of the FSC. In 2010 there were over 120 million hectares of forest (100 ha = 1 square kilometer ⇒ 1.335 million square kilometers. This corresponds to an area of ​​1,000 × 1,335 km).

In Germany

The development of a national standard was initiated in Germany in 1997; In 2001 it was completed with the accreditation . In Germany, 1,438,868 hectares of forest area are certified today (as of June 2020). In January 2018, 1,195,193.5 ha were certified (excluding federal forests). In May 2010 it was still 755,739 hectares, in 2010 this corresponded to around 7% of the forest area in Germany, in January 2013 it was just under 5.3%. There are 2,249 COC (Chain-of-Custody) certificates in Germany.

organization

The FSC is organized in a 3-chamber system: economy, environment and social affairs. Each chamber must approve a resolution. This means that environmental protection organizations and social groups such as indigenous peoples or trade unions also have the opportunity to exert direct influence and their position cannot be overruled. This also applies to the interests of business representatives, which include representatives of the forestry companies as well as representatives of the wood processing industry.

The following applies: The association strives to make decisions by consensus. (Articles of Association § 27th). It is voted according to a 3-chamber principle.

Decisions of the board are valid if

  • more than 10 out of 12 board members are present, including at least 2 members from each chamber
  • at least 7 board members vote positively, including at least 2 members from each chamber

aims

The main objective is to ensure sustainable forest management. This is to be guaranteed by creating uniform standards for forest management worldwide.

FSC tries to put a substantial proportion of all forests in the world under sustainable management. This is expected to be at least 30% of all managed forests. Furthermore, the system for avoiding controversial wood sources (Controlled Wood Standards) is to be established on the markets and for purchasing guidelines of, for example, retailers or governments.

FSC as a process

As a civil society process, the first step towards certification in a country is the establishment of a national working group. This is initiated by a private person who has been accepted by the international organization of the FSC and is in contact with it. This private person then organizes the national working group in accordance with international guidelines. Above all, a 3-chamber system like the one at FSC-International must be created.

The main task of the national working group is the development of a national standard for the certification of sustainable forestry. When the national working group in the 3-chamber system has agreed on such a preliminary standard, the draft is submitted to FSC International for examination. If the draft is approved, certification of sustainable forest management according to this national standard can be carried out in a country. A national standard is evaluated every 5 years and, if necessary, revised.

An important aspect of the development of FSC at the national level is the democratization process that comes with it. In some wooded countries there are hardly any democratic civil society structures such as B. Trade unions, landowners associations, environmental associations, etc. exist. Forestry operations seeking certification must encourage or permit the organization of the workforce and other parties involved.

Certification of forest companies

FSC-certified spruce wood with labeling ( Black Forest )

The certification of forest companies is based on standards developed by the FSC. The globally applicable standards cover ten principles, which contain various criteria that are supplemented by a large number of indicators at national level. Compliance with the criteria should be traced on the basis of these indicators . Accordingly, the principles of sustainable forest management are:

Principle 1: Compliance with forest laws and the FSC principles
Principle 2: Long-term ownership and usage rights to land and forest resources should be clearly defined, documented and legally anchored.
Principle 3: Respect the rights of indigenous peoples
Principle 4: Forest management should maintain or increase the social and economic well-being of those working in the forest and the local population in the long term.
Principle 5: Economic efficiency and product diversity
Principle 6: Guarantee of biodiversity , protective functions of the forest and landscape protection
Principle 7: Creation and implementation of a management plan
Principle 8: Control through appropriate documentation and assessment of sustainability
Principle 9: Preservation of high conservation value forests
Principle 10: As a supplement to more natural forms of cultivation, plantations can provide social and economic advantages and reduce the pressure on natural forests .

In contrast to the international standards, the national certification systems developed within the framework of the ten principles and criteria differ at the operational level. This applies, for example, to the use of clear cuts or pesticides. The differences between the national standards can be traced back to the allocation of indicators by the respective national FSC working groups, which are intended to make it possible to adapt the standards to the respective regional circumstances. Before a national standard for issuing certificates can be legally applied, accreditation by FSC International is required. In Switzerland z. B. the treatment of felled wood with cypermethrin is allowed in the forests.

Chain of custody certification

End product made from FSC-certified wood in stores

A chain of custody certification from FSC controls the flow of wood through processing and trade between the forest and the end customer. Wood products are marked with the FSC logo and made recognizable for the consumer. There are two rules to be distinguished:

  • Products made from 100% FSC-certified wood only carry the FSC mark, an explanatory phrase and the certification number of the manufacturer.
  • Products made from less than 100% FSC wood can bear the FSC mark, an explanation phrase and the manufacturer number if the content of FSC wood is given in percent.

In comparison to all other certifications, the FSC approach is unique in that in the case of a chain of custody certification with a proportion of non-FSC-certified wood in the end product, minimum requirements are also set for the non-FSC proportion. These are formulated in the Controlled Wood Standard . The non-certified portion must therefore not come from illegal logging, from areas with human rights violations or social conflicts, from genetically modified trees or from forests that are worth protecting.

The regulation of percentage labeling was introduced to take account of the complex production of wood products and also to enable the sale of FSC wood from areas with many smaller forest operations. However, since the implementation of the chain of custody (product chain) certification in large-scale industrial production also causes problems with this process, the input-output process is now used, which until 2009 covered the previous regulation of labeling end products with a share of less than 100 % FSC replaced.

The input-output procedure works according to the principle of the electricity market. This means that the amount of FSC wood is registered, which z. B. buys a pulp mill. Such an FSC-certified company can then label end products in the same amount at any point in time.

Accreditation of Certifiers

The certification is carried out exclusively by organizations that have been accredited by Assurance Services International GmbH. 39 companies worldwide are accredited.

When it comes to accreditation, a distinction is made between

  • Sustainable forestry certification
  • Chain of custody certification.

costs

The costs for audits (checks by the certifier to determine whether the required standards are being adhered to by the audited forest operations) are between € 0.30 and € 1.50 per hectare . Much more time-consuming for the companies is the creation of all necessary evidence to meet the standards. The costs are primarily dependent on the existing level of sustainability of the respective company. In many tropical countries, for example, there are no economic plans for the use of forests and very complex initial inventories of large forest areas have to be carried out to create a management plan. Certification is therefore considerably more expensive there than in Central Europe, where this data is usually already available. The chain of custody certification requires a separate certificate for each company that comes into contact with the certified goods. The cost of product chain certification for companies is in the four-digit range. Whoever wants to get certification has to pay an annual fee.

criticism

Criticism from representatives of European forestry

Within the chambers, the FSC no longer differentiates between interest groups. Some representatives of the forest industry therefore criticize the structure of the organization. Due to the weighting of votes , the forest owners represented in the Chamber of Commerce could be overruled by other members of the Chamber of Commerce.

Particularly in countries with a high proportion of private forest ownership such as Germany, small and medium-sized forest enterprises fear paternalism from outside interests and see their property rights too restricted. Private forest ownership in Germany includes property from urban forests to peasant forests to large private forests or the forest managed by the successor companies of the Treuhandanstalt , with partly completely conflicting interests and economic constraints and, last but not least, very differentiated interest representation . The private forest there is not so. The ownership of 46% of the forest area in Germany, which is very different due to the interests and the effective representation, receives 1/52 of the voting rights in one of three chambers. The entire forest property in Germany receives 12/52 votes in one of three chambers.

Another reproach to the conception of the FSC is the operational expenses, especially because of the documentation. The FSC's certification scheme is also perceived as very bureaucratic . The need to prove that the criteria for the award are met before the wood is labeled by the forestry companies is being questioned in Central Europe and also in Germany. German forest owners claim to have played a key role in developing the concept of sustainability and often acted in an exemplary manner.

Criticism from environmental associations and other NGOs

The British environmental organization Rainforest Foundation was accused of granting the right to label products with the FSC label to companies that were involved in serious human rights violations in individual cases. The FSC replied that at the time of the human rights violation, the FSC certificates had already been withdrawn or terminated.

The certification system was also criticized for certifying plantations that were created on primeval forest areas cleared before 1993. In principle, they cannot receive the FSC certificate. Various environmental associations criticize that the seal is awarded too lightly.

The FSC-Watch is by its own name an independent FSC observer and has dedicated itself to educating people about the business conduct of FSC on its website. The site was founded by a group of FSC supporters and members who are concerned about the credibility and trustworthiness of FSC. You want to maintain transparency and thereby illuminate the processes within the FSC. The current projects and certifications of the FSC are published and commented on on the website.

The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation (SSNC) left the FSC-International in 2008 with the argument that the FSC was not effective in Sweden, but remained a member of the Swedish FSC.

Robin Wood has also criticized the FSC for the clear cutting practices of FSC-certified forest companies in Sweden. Robin Wood left FSC International in 2009, mainly because of the certification of eucalyptus monocultures in South America and South Africa and the associated social and ecological problems. Robin Wood will remain active in the national FSC working group for Germany and recognizes that the FSC also contributes to improving forest management.

The Forests and the European Union Resource Network ended its membership in the FSC in 2011 because of its continued support and certification of forest projects to offset greenhouse gas emissions .

Because of the large number of controversial certifications, Friends of the Earth (FoE) (UK) no longer recommends the FSC standard. Other national FoE members continue to support the FSC.

Greenpeace Switzerland has decided to terminate FSC membership at the end of 2017. Greenpeace Germany and Greenpeace International also announced their exit in 2018.

However, critical organizations also emphasize that of the available forestry standards, FSC is still the strongest or that they do not want to support competing standards with their criticism.

Karelia

In November 2011, the Plusminus magazine report reported that High Conservation Value Forests (HCVF) were being felled in the Russian Republic of Karelia on behalf of the IKEA subsidiary Swedwood, even though Swedwood is FSC certified. A maximum of 65 percent of the forests worth protecting there would actually be protected. In a written statement, the FSC did not deny that large areas of forest are being felled in worthy of protection, but instead points to better nature conservation by Swedwood compared to other companies in Karelia.

In 2012, the FSC-certified industrial clear cut in the boreal virgin forests of Karelia was heavily criticized with protests by various organizations. As Save the Rainforest to June 30, 2012 a protest action "? Do you live still or destroy you ever" against the furniture company Ikea started, the managing director of the FSC said in an open letter: "Your statement, the FSC is an eco-label is wrong and has no basis. ”In February 2014 Ikea was revoked the FSC seal of approval.

Other certifications

Web links

Commons : Forest Stewardship Council  - collection of pictures, videos and audio files

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ handelsregister.de
  2. ↑ Published annual financial statements 2015–2018 Federal Gazette
  3. ^ History of the FSC. ( Memento of the original from August 14, 2007 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. fsc.org @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.fsc.org
  4. ↑ Lars H. Gulbrandsen: Creating markets for eco-labeling: are consumers insignificant? In: International Journal of Consumer Studies . tape 30 , no. 5 , September 2006, p. 480 , doi : 10.1111 / j.1470-6431.2006.00534.x . , Section The emergence of fishery and forestry eco-labeling schemes
  5. ↑ Membership portal FSC International. Retrieved April 14, 2019 .
  6. ^ Forest Stewardship Council (Ed.): About FSC Fact Sheet - Forest STewardship Council . February 2010 ( fsc.org [PDF; accessed March 10, 2011]). PDF ( Memento of the original from December 31, 2010 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.fsc.org
  7. ↑ Infocenter FSC-AG Germany
  8. ↑ FSC-certified forestry operations in Germany (PDF) FSC Germany, as of January 25, 2018.
  9. ↑ fsc.org ( Memento of the original from December 30, 2010 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.fsc.org
  10. ↑ Statutes of the FSC AC (PDF) Retrieved on April 14, 2019 (English).
  11. ↑ Principles according to FSC-AG Germany
  12. ↑ Stefanie Wermelinger: In the Swiss forest highly toxic insecticide is sprayed. In: naturschutz.ch. April 8, 2019, accessed May 2, 2019 .
  13. ↑ Hannes Weber: Much more poison is sprayed in the Zurich forest. In: tagesanzeiger.ch . May 10, 2019, accessed September 9, 2019 .
  14. ^ Asi: Forest Stewardship Council , accessed September 4, 2018.
  15. ↑ asi: Find a CAB , accessed on September 4, 2018.
  16. ↑ FAQs on the product chain - What are the costs for certification? FSC Germany, accessed on November 25, 2012 .
  17. ↑ ic.fsc.org
  18. ↑ G egeneinander predominates in the certification. External determination or participation always emerges clearer than the central point of contention . In: Holz-Zentralblatt , 1999, p. 511, ISSN  0018-3792
  19. ↑ FSC certification from the perspective of the private forest owner. AFZ. The forest. ISSN  1430-2713 (2000), pp. 292-294
  20. ↑ Rainforest Foundation ( Memento of the original from November 1, 2009 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.rainforestfoundationuk.org
  21. ↑ Doubts about eco-wood . In: Der Spiegel . No. 46 , 2006, p. 167 ( online ).
  22. ↑ fsc-watch.org
  23. ↑ Archived copy ( Memento of the original dated May 24, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.naturskyddsforeningen.se
  24. ^ Robin Wood demands an immediate stop to the destruction of Swedish natural forests. (No longer available online.) Robin Wood, May 18, 2011, archived from the original on November 19, 2012 ; Retrieved August 18, 2012 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.robinwood.de
  25. ↑ a b Robin Wood leaves FSC International - membership of the FSC working group Germany remains. (No longer available online.) Robin Wood, March 16, 2009, archived from the original March 18, 2013 ; Retrieved August 18, 2012 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.robinwood.de
  26. ↑ a b FERN (Ed.): FERN statement to the Forest Stewardship Council - Why FERN is withdrawing its FSC membership . June 2, 2011 ( online ).
  27. ^ A b Friends of the Earth EWNI: "FSC not recommended". FSC-Watch, March 14, 2012, accessed August 18, 2012 .
  28. ↑ Forest protection: Greenpeace Switzerland relies on independence from FSC. Greenpeace Switzerland, September 18, 2017, accessed on September 19, 2017 .
  29. ↑ rnz.de
  30. ↑ Hanna Gersmann : What really saves the forest? In: taz . April 17, 2018, ISSN  0931-9085 , p. 9 ( taz.de [accessed April 17, 2018]).
  31. ↑ IKEA supplier Swedwood in Karelia: TV documentary exposes impacts of FSC certified clear-cuts in HCV forests . fsc-watch.org, November 10, 2011; Retrieved November 15, 2012.
  32. ^ Sasha Hughes: FSC & Forest Management in Russia. (PDF; 18 kB) FSC International, June 1, 2012, accessed on November 15, 2012 (English).
  33. ^ Statement by FSC® International on TV report in Plusminus about IKEA and FSC forestry in Karelia. (PDF; 130 kB) FSC Germany, November 4, 2011, accessed on November 15, 2012 .
  34. ↑ IKEA under fire for ancient tree logging -Wholly owned subsidiary Swedwood accused of clear-cutting ancient Russian forests for use in furniture . In: The Guardian . May 29, 2012 ( online ).
  35. ↑ Ikea: Do you still live or are you already destroying? Save the rainforest e. V., June 30, 2012, accessed August 18, 2012 .
  36. ↑ Uwe Sayer: FSC's open letter on the RdR campaign of June 30, 2012. (PDF; 79 kB) FSC Germany, July 2, 2012, accessed on March 4, 2020 .
  37. ↑ Press release: FSC is not an eco label. Save the rainforest e. V., July 15, 2012, accessed on August 18, 2012 .
  38. ↑ No trace of sustainability. SWR television , February 25, 2014, accessed on March 24, 2014 .