Certification (forestry)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Certification in forestry is a global process initiated by civil society for the labeling of economically, socially and ecologically sustainable products of the forest with a seal of quality . In a broader sense, the certification system also includes the transport and processing route for these products (especially wood) from the forestry operation through all processing stages to the end consumer (product chain certification ).

Goals, history and development

The development of forest certification is closely linked to the idea of ​​the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) .

Progressive deforestation has been observed around the world for a number of decades, and this has remained unchanged at an average of 11 to 15 million hectares (110,000 to 150,000 km²) during this period. Since then, different approaches have been pursued to prevent the destruction of valuable forests, especially in tropical countries, including the Washington Convention on Species Protection , the International Tropical Timber Organization ( ITTA ) and the intergovernmental Global Environmental Facility (GEF). However, as deforestation continued to advance, environmental NGOs called in the late 1980s to boycott wood products from such countries. However, the realization soon matured that an important source of foreign currency was being withdrawn from richly forested tropical countries , and thus no contribution to economic development or poverty reduction was made . That is why concepts were thought about how to use forestry while preserving these forests and respecting the rights of indigenous peoples and minimum social standards.

When the FSC was founded in 1993, the concept of certification of sustainable forestry therefore initially pursued the main goal of stopping the destruction of primary forests in the tropics in order to carry out the diverse functions of forests (livelihoods of indigenous peoples, biodiversity, protective functions, cultural assets, etc.) to maintain sustainable forest management. At the same time, the market should be supplied with wood products.

When the concept of the FSC began to emerge, a discussion began about the need for certification in general. In the case of small family businesses in particular, the question arose as to whether equal treatment with large transnational companies makes sense; It was also asked whether it was necessary to create a parallel control system in addition to functioning forest legislation where a high level of sustainability had already been achieved. When the establishment of further certification systems such as the Program for Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) , as a result of the previous debates, began towards the end of the 1990s , the discussion expanded to the legitimations and concepts of the different systems, which are increasingly aspects of European forestry came into focus.

There is now a barely manageable number of certification programs. To this day, the FSC claims to be the original and only program in the world capable of guaranteeing sustainability in forestry, especially because the decision-making bodies of the FSC alone give economic, ecological and social interests equal weight. At the same time, however, this is the main reason why the FSC program is sometimes poorly accepted by forest owners. In contrast, the other certification programs, which are often initiated by business associations, demand mutual recognition, as these are also suitable for ensuring the same level of sustainability. The view that the FSC certification program alone effectively improves forestry practice is still shared by the majority of environmental protection associations. An abbreviated presentation of the critical debates shows a predominantly skeptical positioning of the forest, wood and paper industries towards certification in general and the FSC in particular, while environmental associations argue in favor of it.

While the discussion about certification was still very present at the beginning of the decade, today there are mainly other topics on the forest policy agenda, above all illegal logging .

The idea of ​​using market forces to protect forests and achieve sustainable development includes three basic ideas: All interest groups developed principles of sustainable forest management by consensus. These are summarized in a standard . The implementation of these principles is monitored by an independent third party. The sustainable forest products certified in this way are intended to offer better sales opportunities and increase the income of forest companies. Thirdly, all those involved, including consumers, should be made aware of the importance of improved forest management.

Certificates

FSC logo
Logo of the PEFC

Various certification systems now exist, with the majority following a large-regional or national approach. In Europe alone, 32 different certification systems were used in 2002. The following list is only a selection of the most important programs.

International certification schemes

National or major regional certification schemes

Germany

PEFC Germany has not issued a standard specifically for the certification of service providers in forestry. Currently recognized by PEFC Germany (June 2020) are the RAL quality mark for forest and landscape management , the German Forest Service Certificate (DFSZ), the “Competent Forest Partner” certificate (KFP) and KUQS. The Naturland association has also developed guidelines and certification for forest use, certified companies are allowed to label their products with the ecological forest use recognized by Naturland .

Europe

Outside of Europe

state of development

In January 2006, 271 million hectares of forest were certified worldwide. According to the FAO's definition of forest area, this corresponds to 7% of the world's forests and around 20% of all forests managed worldwide. The vast majority of certified forests are located in the northern hemisphere, especially in North America. The certification schemes PEFC (almost 69%) and FSC (around 25%) dominate the market.

The following table shows the distribution of certified forest areas taking into account different certification systems worldwide (figures in million hectares) in January 2006.

continent FSC PEFC Other total Percentage ownership %
Africa 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.6
South East Asia 2.4 5.2 4.7 12.2 4.5
Europe 35.0 55.9 0.0 90.9 33.5
North America 22.5 123.6 12.0 158.0 58.3
South America 6.5 1.6 0.0 8.1 3.0
total 68.10 186.10 16.70 271.00 100
Market share in% 25.14 68.69 6.17 100.00
Tropical countries 8.0 0.0 4.7 12.8 4.7
Non-tropical countries 60.1 186.1 12.0 258.2 95.3
Developed countries 37.6 186.0 12.0 235.6 86.9
Developing countries 30.5 0.0 4.7 35.2 13.1

For 2012 PEFC states the PEFC-certified forest area with 237.4 million hectares worldwide, FSC states 147.1 million hectares. The main reasons for the slow progression of certification in developing countries are many. In the meantime (as of June 2020) 325 million hectares worldwide are PEFC-certified and over 210 million hectares are FSC-certified. FSC exceeded the 200 million hectare mark on February 9, 2018.

The demand for certified wood is low on the world and national markets. So far there are only significant markets for certified wood in Europe and North America. In addition, only a few consumers are interested in the topic. Most consumers are also not prepared to pay an additional price for certified wood, since the certified wood product offers no additional benefit compared to the non-certified wood.

There is a large gap between forest management practice and standards. This is very often due to the lack of skilled workers. There are around 100 trained forest managers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, but 133.6 million hectares of forest - more than ten times the forest area of ​​Germany. In addition, standards for maintaining biodiversity are much more difficult to maintain in tropical rainforests than in European forests in temperate climates , because the number of species is much higher there.

Policies to improve forestry practice cannot be formulated and implemented at national level. This is due to a shortage of skilled workers, insufficient financial resources or the unwillingness of political decision-makers. In addition, there are weak governance structures (corruption and illegal logging). In addition, ownership of the land or forest products is often not clear. This leads to unregulated usage. Ultimately, insufficient coordination with other economic sectors is also an obstacle.

There is a lack of capacity to set up an effective national certification organization (e.g. a national FSC office). This means that a certification process cannot be initiated or pushed.

Ultimately, high direct and indirect costs also play an important role in relation to the so far low success of forest certification in developing countries. Direct costs are incurred for the certification process, indirect costs arise from improving management practice. For example, moving away from the previously common logging techniques in Malaysia towards one that is compatible with certification would increase harvesting costs by 65%. In general, tropical rainforests can only be managed with great financial outlay.

criticism

Important objectives have not yet been achieved, as the basic idea of ​​certification at the time of its creation was to stop the destruction of primary forests in the tropics. However, this did not succeed on a large scale for various reasons. Of the 271 million hectares of certified forest, 95% are in North America or Europe. 87% of the certified forests are in developed countries, where the existence of the forest is practically not endangered and high social standards in forestry apply.

The objective of using a globally recognized certification system for wood to protect well-managed forest companies from competition from wood from illegal logging or from unsustainable production has not yet been achieved. Instead, the need for state or legally binding instruments is discussed in order to achieve this goal. In the EU, the FLEGT (Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade) action plan. In Germany there was an initiative for a “primeval forest protection law”.

literature

  • Certification Information Service: Source Book. European Forest Institute. Irregularly updated collection of pages of the Certification Information Service (CIS), which has been financed by the EFI and DG VIII of the European Union since the mid-1990s.

References

  1. ↑ Certification Information Service: Source Book. European Forest Institute. Section 1, p. 3.
  2. ↑ Forest certification: practical implementation of sustainable development. GTZ: Development + Rural Areas. ISSN  0343-6462 (1999), pp. 25-28.
  3. ↑ Certification Information Service: Source Book. European Forest Institute. Section 1, p. 40.
  4. ↑ The End of the Faith War - FSC and PEFC. AFZ. The forest. ISSN  1430-2713 (1999), pp. 888-890
  5. ↑ Certification remains a long-running forest policy issue. Wooden central sheet. ISSN  0018-3792 (1998), pp. 155-156.
  6. ↑ There is a predominance of one another in certification. External determination or participation always emerges clearer than the central point of contention. Wooden central sheet. ISSN  0018-3792 (1999), p. 511.
  7. ↑ a b c d e f g h i Durst, PB, Brown, CL and Appanah, S .: "Challenges facing certification and eco-labeling of forest products in developing countries. International Forestry Review, Vol. 8 (2), 2006 Shropshire (UK), Commonwealth Forestry Association, pp. 193-200, ISSN  1465-5489 .
  8. ↑ http://forestportal.efi.int/lists.php?pl=02.30&sf=1 according to the EFI Euroforest portal.
  9. ↑ Archived copy ( Memento of the original dated December 20, 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. Own representation @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.celb.org
  10. ↑ Information on forest entrepreneur certification. PEFC, January 1, 2014, accessed June 30, 2020 .
  11. ^ History of the SFI ( Memento of July 14, 2008 in the Internet Archive ), own presentation
  12. ↑ Annual report 2012 from PEFC Germany e. V., p. 6 ( Memento of the original from December 15, 2013 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. . @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / pefc.de
  13. ↑ Facts and Figures on FSC growth and markets, April 2012, Chart 5 .
  14. ↑ Facts & Figures | Forest Stewardship Council. Retrieved July 2, 2020 .
  15. ↑ bill UrwSchG .

Web links