Session I, Section C Observations on Forest Certification B. BRUCE BARE College of Forest Resources University of Washington, Seattle This paper is an adaptation of a Powerpoint presenta- tion on forest certification. It is a brief tutorial for intro- WHAT IS IT? ducing forest certification and discusses the pros/cons of certification as well as the relationship to other policy • Process by which a forest owner tools such as forest conservation easements, Habitat voluntarily requests an inspection of a Conservation Plans, cost sharing, and forest practice forest to determine if pre-defined management standards are being met. regulations. • Process for assessing if a forest is managed sustainably. • A way to communicate environmental information about forests to consumers. OUTLINE • What is it? • Purpose and approaches? • Who sets the guidelines? • Costs and benefits? and consumers of forest products demand certified prod- • Relationship to incentives and regulations? ucts, forest certification could effectively become re- quired for forest owners who wish to retain market share. Forest certification is a means of communicating to buyers of forest products that the forest (producing the products) is being managed in a sustainable manner. Many owners claim that they have been managing their The topics covered in this presentation include: forests sustainably for years and, therefore, see no rea- 1. A definition of forest certification and its relationship son to become certified. This misses the point. Certifi- to sustainable forestry. cation is a mechanism to communicate this information 2. The approaches various organizations adopt to to consumers even if it does not significantly change on- certify forests. the-ground management practices of an owner who is already practicing sustainable forestry. 3. Major groups offering certification schemes and how they differ. Sources: 4. A summary of the costs and benefits of forest Sedjo, R.A., A. Goetzl and S.O. Moffat. 1998. Sustainability certification. of Temperate Forests, Resources for the Future, Wash- 5. The relationship of certification to other incentive ington, D.C. programs like cost sharing, HCPs and forest conserva- World Commission on Environment and Development, tion easements as contrasted with governmental 1987. Our Common Future, Oxford University Press, regulations. Oxford, England. It is important to understand that forest certification is Stevens, J., M. Ahmad and S. Ruddell.1998. Forest Prod- a voluntary program. This is in contrast to governmen- ucts Certification: A Survey of Manufacturers. Forest tal regulations that are involuntary. If large buyer groups Products J. 48(6)43:49. Bare Observations on Forest Certification 139 Session I, Section C WHAT IS SUSTAINABLE PURPOSE AND APPROACHES? FORESTRY? • Balancing environmental, social and • A 1990’s initiative that encourages economic factors to meet the needs of the landowners to practice sustainable forestry present without compromising the ability and to give consumers assurance that forest of future generations to meet their needs. products come from sustainable forests. Includes both forest certification and chain- of-custody components. FOREST CERTIFICATION AND SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY • Forest certification isn’t necessary to PURPOSE AND APPROACHES? guarantee sustainability -- it may not be sufficient. • Performance-based • Best viewed as: 1) important “policy driver” for improving forest management – Use criteria and indicators to monitor standards and practices 2) satisfying buyer performance over time (on-the -ground) groups and consumers of forest products. • Management system-based – Generic guidelines and standards (ISO 14001) – Forestry-specific (SFI, CSA) The definition conveys the notion that sustainable forestry is much broader in scope than sustained yield forestry which concentrates on timber production. It also highlights the intergenerational issues inherent in forest The move towards forest certification accelerated in management. the 1990’s following the 1992 United Nations Confer- ence on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Source: Rio de Janeiro. An Intergovernmental Panel on Forests World Commission on Environment and Development. was established by the UN Commission on Sustainable 1987. Our Common Future, Oxford University Press, Development (UNCSD) in 1995. In 1997, an Intergov- Oxford, England. ernmental Forum on Forests succeeded the IPF. This Some state forest practices regulations (i.e., State of group recommended that a UN Forum of Forests be Washington) have “raised the bar” to heights sufficient established. In 1993 the majority of European countries to achieve sustainable forestry with little or no addi- endorsed six criteria for defining sustainable forests in tional effort. Many forest owners implement practices the Helsinki Process. In 1994 the Montreal Process cov- well above these levels. Thus, certification is not neces- ering boreal and temperate Forests was formed and led sary to achieve sustainability on these forests. to the Santiago Declaration in 1995. The USA endorsed Depending on the type of forest certification sought, this latter convention. It contains seven criteria and 67 and the level of state forest practices required, it may be indicators that are used to define sustainable forest man- possible to achieve both and yet fail to produce a sus- agement: 1) biodiversity conservation, 2) maintenance tainable forest in actuality. of ecosystem productivity, 3) maintenance of ecosys- tem health and vitality, 4) soil and water conservation, It is safe to say that forest certification is a policy 5) maintenance of forest contributions to global carbon instrument that can be used (perhaps in tandem with cycles, 6) maintenance of long-term multiple socioeco- others) to improve the practice of forestry while simul- nomic benefits and 7) legal/policy/ institutional frame- taneously providing buyer groups and consumers with works for forest conservation and sustainable manage- the information they need to make informed buying ment. choices. Developed in parallel with these international move- Source: ments to define sustainable forestry, certification was Kiekens, J.P. 1995. Timber Certification: A Critique, aimed at both forests and forest products. We refer to Unasylva 46(184):27 the former as forest certification and the latter as chain- 140 Observations on Forest Certification Bare Session I, Section C of-custody. Not all certification schemes embrace the latter component. Forest certification schemes vary greatly in their de- WHO DOES THE CERTIFYING? sign and intent. However, all fall into one of two catego- ries: 1) performance-based or 2) management system- •First party -- the land owner or firm based. As its name implies, performance-based systems use specific measures (called criteria and indicators) to • Second party -- the industry or an monitor on-the-ground performance over time. Man- association agement-based systems rely on the establishment of gen- • Third party -- an independent certifier eral standards that conform to sustainable forestry prin- – Rainforest Alliance (SmartWood, FSC) ciples. Oftentimes, they are linked to the ISO 14001 – Scientific Certification Systems (FSC) process. – SFI, PEFC (Voluntary Verification) The International Standards Organization (ISO), formed in 1947, promotes world-wide standards, inter- national consistency and international trade. ISO 14000 grew out of ISO’s commitment to support the objective of sustainable development discussed at the 1992 meet- Various international governmental efforts have spun- ing of UNCED in Rio de Janeiro. off of the 1992 UNCED in Rio de Janeiro. The Inter- ISO 14001, adopted in 1996, provides the interna- governmental Panel on Forests and its successor the tional standard for self-declaration or certification of an Intergovernmental Forum on Forests were established organization’s Environmental Management System by the UNCSD and have worked unsuccessfully to es- (EMS). Contained within ISO 14000 are environmental tablish a binding international agreement regarding the management, life cycle analysis, environmental audit- sustainable management of forests. The Helsinki Minis- ing, environmental labeling and environmental perfor- terial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Eu- mance evaluation. ISO 14001 is neither industry-spe- rope established six criteria for sustainable forests and cific nor performance-based. It allows organizations to the Working Group on Criteria and Indicators for the establish their own environmental policy so long as it Conservation and Sustainable Management of Boreal adheres to all applicable domestic laws and regulations. and Temperate Forests (held in Montreal) lead to the Firms may use first, second or third party certifiers and Santiago Declaration (1995) which established seven all reports may be confidential. criteria for forest sustainability. These criteria and their accompanying indicators are to be used nationally to assess the attainment of sustainable forestry practices. Numerous organizations have utilized the international WHO SETS THE GUIDELINES? criteria and indicators to help define national/regional standards. The American Forest and Paper Association • Government established the Sustainable Forestry Initiative for use on – UNCSD (IPF, IFF, Helsinki and Montreal forest industry lands in the USA. In 1998, non-AF&PA Processes, Santiago Declaration) members also became eligible to become SFI Licens- • Private ees. The Pan European Forest Certification