Progress in Timber Certification
(Part 2)
Initiatives World-wideSecond Edition - October 1996
Written by R J W Oliver
Published by Forests Forever
Part One
1. Introduction
2. Definitions
3. Development of Forest Management Standards
4. Transnational certification initiativesPart Two
5. National Initiatives (United Kingdom)
6. Other International Institutions Activities
7. AppendixAustralia | Austria | Belgium | Bolivia | Brazil | Canada | Czech Republic | Denmark | Finland | France | Germany | Ghana | Guyana | Indonesia | Malaysia | Mexico | Netherlands | New Zealand | Norway | Papua New Guinea | Poland | Russia | South Africa | Sweden | Switzerland | United Kingdom | United States |
At this point, government agencies responsible for forestry in Australia do not plan to introduce a national certification scheme, nor require labelling of imported timber. However, in Spring 1996 the Australian Government hosted an lnternational Conference on the Certification and Labelling of Forest Products, with the dual aim of discussing future certification activities in Australia, and to provide direct input to the lnter-govemmental Panel on Forests.
A representative of the National Association of Forest Industries is participating in the lnternational StudyGroup examining the use of ISO14000 as a tool for the certification of forest management. The Forest and Wood Products Research and Development Corporation have funded a consultancy in order to examine the attitudes of a wide range of interest groups on certification and labelling.
Following an unsuccessful attempt to legislate against tropical timber imports in 1992, the Austrian Government has continued to actively support certification.
Under a Federal law that is now in place, a voluntary labelling scheme is being developed to apply to all timber. The law lays down the main principles of sustainable forestry and entrusts the Ministry for Environment, Youth and Family with the task of developing criteria and indicators for certification at forest level taking into account the guidelines of relevant international organisations- An Advisory Board on certification has been set up by the government including representatives from all relevant interest groups, A feasibility study has been commissioned to consider the monitoring and documentation system required for both forest management and chain of custody certification.
Definite targets for the full implementation of a certification system have not yet been set and the question of arrangements for establishing international harmonisation or mutual recognition of the Austrian system in export markets has yet to be resolved.
i) Domestic Production
WWF Belgium funded a study completed in 1995 to assess the feasibility of certifying Belgian forests, which supply approximately 40% of the country's total wood production. The study concluded that the FSC Principles and Criteria, while reasonable in scope, would be difficult to apply to Belgian forests. As a follow up to the study, a National Working Group has been established with a broad membership, to draft standards for Belgian forest management using the FSC Principles and Criteria as the starting point. However, due to extensive variation in the perceptions of the state of forest management in Belgium, it appears that a national consensus on appropriate standards for certification will be difficult to reach.
ii) Imports
WWF Belgium is organising a "1997 Group" of timber consuming companies, whose aims and operation are similar to the 1995 Group in the UK. The Belgian group has about 50 members including individual timber retailers and timber importers, together with the Federation of Timber Importers and the Federation of Timber Retailers. The members have committed themselves to tracking the origin of timber sold and to having some wood FSC certified by January 1997.
In 1995, WWF Belgium was successful in obtaining funding from the European Commission to undertake a programme to promote sustainable forest management and certification in Western and Central Africa.
Bolivia has progressed furthest amongst South American countries towards the development of a national certification scheme. The process to design and develop a scheme for Bolivia began in 1994 following the completion of a feasibility study entitled "Bolivia Sustainable Forest Management" funded by USAID which recommended the development of a national scheme.
An Organisational Committee was established with a mandate to develop national standards for the certification of lowland forests in North East Bolivia and to design an institutional structure. A Standards Committee was subsequently established in 1995 to draft forest management standards for certification using the FSC Principles and Criteria as a starting point. The standards are currently being discussed and reviewed.
A civil association, the Bolivian Council for Voluntary Forest Certification, has also been established to ensure the credibility of certification and to carry out the following tasks: to develop norms and standards for forest management certification and seek their approval from other parties (e.g. ISO, ITTO, FSC); act as a mediator in disputes: promote the Council; and to be a focal point for all interested parties.
The first certification was due to be carried out in October 1995 and FSC recognition was scheduled to be sought by the end of 1995. In 1996, three local accredited certifiers are expected to be operational and the target is to have 25% of all Bolivian forests certifiable within seven years. Bolivia recently passed a new National Forest Law, which calls, amongst other things, for mandatory certification of all Bolivian forests. There is some confusion as to how certification will complement the new law.
In 1993 the Brazilian Society for Silviculture (SBS) began to develop a national certification scheme, known as CERFLOR, with technical assistance from a range of research institutes. CERFLOR is developing a set of principles and criteria for forest management certification which are designed to take into account regional variations in forestry and to ensure their compatibility with international initiatives. AII the principles and criteria will be subject to impartial evaluation. In the first phase, CERFLOR has concentrated on the development of criteria and indicators for plantations, and has developed a methodology for the evaluation and subsequent award of the "CERFLOR seal". The system relies on certification by independent certifiers and mechanisms have been developed to accredit certifiers. The CERFLOR scheme is currently being tested in Brazilian plantations, and further work is being undertaken to build an effective institutional structure.
IMAFLORA, a Brazilian institute specialising in the eco-labelling of agricultural commodities has recently ventured into forest products certification in association with the Rainforest Alliance (USA). Its strategy is to develop criteria and indicators on a regional basis which are compatible with the FSC Principles and Criteria. The focus is on small scale, principally community based forestry projects. At present they are working on two projects - the first involving the certification of wooden boxes from the Atlantic forest; and the second involving nut and rubber production in the Amazon basin.
Following environmentalist criticism of the UK's trade in mahogany with Brazil during the early 1990s, the UK Timber Trade Federation's National Hardwood Association (NHA) and AIMEX, the timber exporters' association of the Brazilian state of Para, from which most of UK's imports of Brazilian tropical timber are sourced, developed a scheme to certify mahogany from legal sources. Although not strictly speaking a timber certification scheme (as it does not involve an independent assessment of forest management), the scheme plays an important role in reassuring buyers in the UK that timber derives from legitimate sources, and in raising the awareness of Brazilian producers of the need to provide credible guarantees of environmentally sound practices.
WWF Brazil has also established a working group in Brazil that has developed target dates by which to develop and gain agreement for forest management standards in Brazil, and to develop an FSC based certification framework. Funding has been provided by the Ford Foundation.
Another approach to certification is demonstrated by Cellulose de Bahia, a major eucalyptus pulp producing company, that has recently been certified under BS7750, the UK's Environmental Management Standard, and is expected to be heavily promoting this certificate as part of its marketing strategy.
Canada has made considerable progress towards the development of a nationally based certification programme which is compatible with the ISO14001 approach.
In 1994, the Canadian forest industry formed a coalition and requested the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) to develop sustainable forest management standards A multi-stakeholder Technical Committee with 32 members has formulated two documents which constitute the main elements of the initiative: the Z-808 Guidance Document provides a general description of the Sustainable Forest Management Standard: and the Z-809 Auditor's Specification Document provides more detailed requirements which an organisation will have to comply with to obtain certification.
The two standard documents were subject to a nation-wide public review during March 1996 and pilot audits have been carried out on 6 sites across the country to test the applicability of the standards. The first certifications under the scheme are anticipated during 1996.
The CSA's certification standards were developed on the basis of criteria and indicators of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) developed at the national level under the aegis of the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers. They are fully compatible with the SFM Principles and Criteria for non European temperate and Boreal Forests developed under the Montreal Process.
The CSA standard applies to a Defined Forest Area (DFA) and its management process. Any combination of owners, managers and public and private land is acceptable in defining a DFA. The certification system does not at this stage require the tracking of timber through a chain-of-custody and does not therefore result in the labelling of the timber product.
A separate initiative in Canada is the recent establishment of a FSC national working group. The group is currently in the process of facilitating and co-ordinating the development of a series of regional performance based standards reflecting the range of ecosystem conditions and political jurisdictions that exist in Canada, while remaining consistent with the FSC Principles and Criteria.
In 1995 a working group was established to study forest management certification in the country. Its membership includes NGOs, the forest industry and forest owners.
The Danish Government, which is the major owner of Denmark's forests, is closely following the on-going debate relating to certification. It is also carrying out field experiments to assess the feasibility of certifying Danish forests.
Finland is participating in the Nordic Timber Certification Project which aims to develop a common approach to certification in Nordic Countries.
Due to the predominance of small scale non-industrial private forest ownership in Finland, the development of effective regional level certification is seen as a priority. Finland has recently developed indicators for sustainable forest management at the National level as a follow up to the Helsinki process. A major study entitled "A Development Strategy for Sustainable Forestry and Regional Certification" is currently underway. The aim is to develop principles for the preparation of sustainable forestry strategies at regional level which are in accordance with the national level indicators. The principles are currently being tested in the Birkaland region of Southern Finland which covers several hundred thousand hectares and has more than 10,000 owners. Although the project is not directly related to certification, a principal aim is to identify indicators that may be used to measure the sustainability of forestry at regional level and which may provide a basis for certification. All the interest groups from the forestry sectors, including the public at large, are involved through a structured participation process. The project will be completed in autumn 1996.
During April 1996, Finland's agricultural and environmental Ministers invited a broad range of interest groups to participate in a Committee established under the leadership of Helsinki University to look into the question of forest certification in Finland. The forestry sector has reacted positively to the initiative and discussions are underway with environmental groups concerning their participation. It has been suggested that in addition to the Rio/Helsinki documents, the committee base its work on Environmental Management Systems, EMAS and the FSC Principles and Criteria.
As a separate exercise, WWF-Finland has tested the draft certification criteria developed in Sweden in 1994 in four pilot forests and has been promoting FSC in Finland.
The first environmental management systems certificate in the Finnish forest industry was recently obtained by Enso-Gutzeit Oy's Enocell mill which was certified to BS7750 as a complement to the ISO9002 quality management standard.
i) Domestic Production
No consensus has been reached in France on the need for, or design of a certification system for domestically produced timber. The French forest owners have strong reservations in relation to forest management certification, being particularly concerned about its impact on the international competitiveness of small forest owners. Furthermore there is anxiety that assessment criteria may not be adaptable to local conditions. The French government is not intending to intervene except to fix the rules of trade and to avoid distortions.
ii) Imports
The French Government believes that certification of all imported wood is both desirable and inevitable. Its preference would be to work through a multilateral system (such as GATT, lTTO or similar) to prevent trade distortions. In her development co-operation, France has been directly supportive of the African Timber Organisation's certification scheme. More recently France financed the testing of sustainability criteria and indicators in Cote d'lvoire as part of the CIFOR co-ordinated global research programme.
The French forest industry company, Isoroy, has been working on the development of certification in Gabon in association with SGS Forestry and a French University which is developing forest management standards compatible with those of the FSC, lsoroy has already introduced a Green Label for the species okoume in order to stress that it is not an endangered species.
i) Domestic Production
There is an on-going discussion in Germany relating to the certification of domestic forests. The Forest Owners' Association has been sceptical of the idea due to strict regulations and a long term tradition of forest management in the country. The small average size of holdings is seen as a major constraint, but the potential role of voluntary certification as a market tool is recognised.
There is also an initiative called the "Timber Register of Eco-Efficient Sales" established in 1993 to develop improved standards for forest management in the Black Forest region in SW Germany. The process has been led by a German company, Trees for People, and has been created to try to stem the growing substitution of timber by other materials. TFP developed forestry standards in association with district forest managers on the basis of long used and tested regional practices but revised to include a wider range of social and environmental criteria. The standards have been undergoing review by a wide range of NGOs.
As a separate initiative, the WWF established an FSC National Working Group in Germany during 1995.
ii) Importers
Initiative Tropenwald (ITW) is one of the longest standing certification initiatives anywhere, established in 1992 after two years of debate on the tropical forestry issue with the aim of investigating alternatives to timber imports and bans. Although originally founded by industry and the main timber trade union, the group later sought to involve other interests including NGOs and government.
ITW has recently completed a comprehensive proposal relating to the structure and implementation of a timber certification scheme for imported timber. The scheme is designed to serve as a trade promotion instrument in those markets where environmental concerns are important and where a price premium can be expected. The system has a 2 pronged approach: i) certification of the imported products up to point of entry into the German market is regarded as the responsibility of the exporter: while ii) the chain of custody certification in Germany is carried out by a Trademark Association established for that purpose. A relatively low market share is targeted, but it will be increased if the scheme is successful.
In addition to verifying the chain of custody, the Trademark Association would be responsible for assessing the various certificates provided by exporters. Any certification schemes where performance criteria are adequate and the certification process is credible would be recognised provided that credibility amongst consumers is not an issue. Timber certified under recognised schemes would be labelled with a Trademark owned by the Association. Members of the Association would come initially from trade, industry and trade unions, and later on from NGOs.
As part of the scheme, ITW has developed a set of criteria and indicators of good forest management which are being tested by CIFOR. While the criteria and indicators are a useful contribution to the international discussion, it is not envisaged that imported timber will be certified according to them. Instead the Trademark Association would recognise appropriate national standards developed in producing countries on the basis of the recommendations of an independent review panel. The panel would take into account the compatibility of national standards with existing international guidelines such as those developed by ITTO and the FSC. The scheme is expected to be operational during the second half of 1996.
The German paper industry is strongly supportive of the rapid implementation of an internationally recognised certification system and believes that an approach within the ISO14000 series of standards offers the most viable solution.
In June 1992, Ghana announced that it intends to develop a national timber certification scheme. A National Working Group is to be set up to prepare national forestry standards for certification based on the UNCED Forest Principles, the ITTO Guidelines, and the work of other "relevant" international agencies. The Group will comprise representatives from the Government, timber industry, landowners, foresters, academics and NGO organisations.
Forest management certification has not yet begun to be discussed or promoted widely in Guyana. However, prior to the establishment of the FSC and its guidelines, Demerera Timber Ltd. in Guyana was certified by SGS Forestry to Demerera's own Green Charter.
Indonesia has invested heavily in and progressed rapidly towards the development of an effective national certification scheme. As early as 1993 a Working Group had been established to develop criteria and indicators for timber certification and to set up the necessary institutional arrangements. On the recommendation of the Working Group, an independent non profit Eco-labelling Institute (LEI) was established. LEI's mandate is to implement a national timber certification scheme that is recognised internationally. It is intended that LEI will issue eco-labels, while the existing National Standardisation Institute will be responsible for accrediting certifiers. Responsibility for chain of custody certification is to be left in the hands of the private sector without LEI's direct involvement.
The World Bank has provided a grant to fund the early development of the LEI. Once established it is likely to be funded from the Government's Reforestation Fund. A key concern has been to ensure that LEl receives no direct funding from concessionaires to ensure the Institute's independence.
LEI has built on the work of the earlier Working Group and previous government initiatives to develop a set of sustainability criteria and indicators for certification through a wide ranging consultative process. The reference material used included the ITTO Guidelines, the ISO14000 series of standards and the FSC's Principles and Criteria. There are currently two sets of criteria covering natural and plantation forest which are undergoing field tests. Efforts are being made to further refine the criteria so that they more accurately reflect regional and local conditions. Criteria have not yet been developed for conversion forest.
LEl believe that the ISO14000 series of standards could provide the necessary international framework for the harmonisation of timber certification schemes. In the meantime the present general ISO provisions for accreditation and certification are being applied. The aim is to continue capacity building over the next 3 years and to launch a fully operational system by the year 2000, in accordance with Indonesia's commitment to ITTO Objective 2000.
The LEI initiative has managed to maintain a fully participatory process, has the support of several key Indonesian and international NGOs and is the sole activity related to certification in the country.
The Malaysian Government is considering the establishment of a timber certification scheme. A committee chaired by the Malaysian Timber Industry Board and with representatives from the government, timber trade and environmental organisations, was set up in 1994 to discuss certification issues. The committee has proposed the establishment of a National Certification Centre and recommended that a national scheme should be operational by the year 2000. The role of the Centre and the framework for certification has yet to be decided. However a National Committee on Sustainable Forest Management has been formed within the Forestry Department with the aim of examining how the ITTO Criteria for Sustainable Forest Management can be applied at national, regional, state, company, forest owner or forest management level. This work should provide a sound basis for the development of a national certification scheme.
In Mexico, home of the FSC headquarters, strong NGO backed efforts are underway to promote forest management certification country-wide. The most notable initiative was the creation in 1993 of the Mexican Council for Sustainable Forestry, which has gained funding from the Ford Foundation and Smart Wood and which is supported by the FSC. The Council is made up of environmental and social NGOs, forestry organisations and individual members. Its main goal is to contribute to forest policy formulation, provide technical assistance to forest managers and to act as a focal point for certification activities. The Council is conducting several activities with the aim of developing forest management standards for Mexico's forests and to establish a national certification scheme. The scheme would be primarily directed at the domestic market.
i) Domestic Production
The Dutch Government has played a central role in the development of the nation's certification programme, The Government's international forest policy calls for the sustainable management of all forests by the year 2000. The development of a harmonised international system of certification of sustainable forest management is seen as an important component of this policy.
In 1995, the main interest groups involved in Dutch forestry signed a National Forest Accord as a joint commitment to implement the Dutch Long Term Forest Policy Plan 1994-2020 with the major objective of ensuring the sustainable management of Dutch forests. The Accord included a commitment to develop a voluntary certification system for forest management in the Netherlands. As the first stage in the implementation of this policy, the European criteria and indicators agreed during the Helsinki process are being elaborated for application at national level through a broad based participatory approach.
ii) Imports
The Netherlands was the first country to set a deadline for switching over to the import of only certified timber. In 1994 a covenant entitled "The Netherlands Framework Agreement on Tropical Timber" (NFATT) was signed by the government, private sector and two NGOs (WWF, IUCN). The Covenant called for all signatories to cease the use of non-certified timber by the end of 1995. Following a review of the policy in 1994, the target date was amended to the year 2000 and the policy extended to include all forests.
In line with the Covenant, the Dutch Government contracted Coopers and Lybrand, in association with the Foundation for Certification of Timber, Timber Products and Timber Constructions, to develop a "Timber Hallmark Scheme" - a voluntary chain of custody certification programme - for certified wood products that enter the Dutch market.
Under the Hallmark scheme, the timber producing country is regarded as responsible for the development and application of national sustainable forestry principles and criteria: the independent auditing of forest management: and the chain of custody auditing of certified timber up to the point of shipment. In order to facilitate the development of appropriate national certification schemes, joint working groups have been developed between the Netherlands and four major tropical timber producing countries (Malaysia, Indonesia, Gabon and Cameroon). The Dutch government take the view that national certification schemes should be compatible with EU and World Trade Organisation obligations. They have also voiced support for the ISO process as a mechanism to achieve international harmonisation of national schemes, and have actively encouraged the development of EU-wide certification initiatives.
As the NFATT expired in 1995, the private sector has taken on the responsibility of setting up the Hallmark system with a view to introducing a relatively small quantity of certified timber onto the Dutch market during 1996. lnitial certification of timber under the scheme will be regarded as "temporary" until such time as national certification schemes are fully operational. To date, the chain of custody system in the Netherlands has been tested successfully on a trial basis in 6 companies involved in the window frame and water-based construction sectors.
A comprehensive range of laws and voluntary codes govern New Zealand's forestry sector. These have increasingly included environmental and social elements, for example:
ln 1993 a new law was passed, called the Forest Amendment Act, that introduced comprehensive legislation governing the production of timber from indigenous forests.A voluntary Forest Code of Practice was introduced in 1991 that embodies environmental, scenic, cultural and many other values in the management system it lays out. Most of the larger plantation forest owners have adopted this code.
ln 1991, a voluntary "New Zealand Forest Accord" was signed between major commercial forest and forest industry organisations and conservation groups. Amongst a variety of other measures, the Accord guarantees that industry will no longer clear natural forest for the development of plantations.
The New Zealand forest industry has taken the view that forest management certification may be effectively achieved using the ISO4000 series of standards. To facilitate this process, the country's standards. To facilitate this process, the country's standards institute, Standards New Zealand, has been acting as the Secretariat for the ISO International Study Group on Sustainable Forest Management.
The Norwegian Government has not taken a position on certification, which is in any case problematic in Norway due to the high proportion of forests owned by small non industrial private owners. However the government has emphasised the importance of an improved documentation system to register and monitor the environmental influences of forest management. In this respect the government has initiated a comprehensive registration-of-effects programme which includes the long term monitoring of environmental conditions and an annual registration of forestry activities. The programme will allow the government to accurately assess whether forestry activities are sustainable, and to better focus forest improvement measures.
At this stage, the forestry community agrees that priority should be given to the development of national level criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management in accordance with the Helsinki principles. They also recognise the importance of creating confidence in both international and domestic markets that Norwegian timber derives from sustainable forests. The most effective mechanisms to achieve this goal have yet to be established.
Against this background, Norwegian forest owners, forest industry, environmental groups, government, trade unions, and consumers' organisations are currently co-operating in the Living Forests project. The project is not strictly speaking a certification programme, but may provide the building blocks from which certification could develop. The programme is based on research and development and a major aim is to demonstrate that Norwegian forest owners and industry have the will and ability to conduct long term sustainable forest management.
Field tests in real-life forestry form an essential component of the Living Forests project. In order to develop acceptable and realistic criteria for sustainable forestry in Norway, four separate forest areas are being involved in pilot projects during 1996. The 250 forest owners located in these areas are being invited to apply a set of "guidelines for nature conservation in forestry". The aim is to refine the guidelines so that they actively encourage progress in forest management in accordance with sustainability principles, and to develop workable documentation and certification mechanisms. The pilot projects also include assessments of the effects of the forestry guidelines and documentation systems on the incomes of individual forest owners, log deliveries, and the local and national economy.
Living Forest forms the Norwegian component of the Nordic Forest Certification Project.
To date little progress has been made towards the development of a recognisable national certification system in Papua New Guinea, primarily because the majority of exports go to S.E. Asian markets in which there is no demand for certified products, However the government of PNG supports ITTO's Target 2000 and has taken several steps to make the necessary changes to forest management to achieve compliance. The new Forest Policy of 1991, enforced by the Forestry Act of the same year, requires that forests be managed on a sustainable basis. The Government has also begun the development of Code of Practice for forest management that respects cultural and environmental values. In addition, SGS Forestry has been retained by the PNG Government to monitor log exports in an attempt to increase revenue collection in an operation which could lay the foundation for chain of custody certification.
To date no work has been undertaken on the development of a national certification system in Poland. Despite the lack of recognised certification standards, FSC has recently endorsed the certification by SGS Forestry of a relatively large area of state owned Polish forests.
The Russian Federal Forest Service is currently developing a national system of timber certification, the details of which were described at the lnternational Conference on Certification and Labelling of Products from Sustainably Managed Forests held in Brisbane during May 1996.
Following a Presidential Decree entitled "The concept of the transition of the Russian Federation to sustainable development" passed on April 1 1996, the Federal Forest Service was ordered to develop a series of new clauses for the national forest policy. These clauses included "A programme for the development of sustainable forest management in Russia" and the "Rules for forest products certification". An ad hoc expert committee comprising foresters, forest scientists and ecologists, has subsequently been established under the auspices of the AII Russian Research and Information Centre for Forest Resources to consider the development of a certification system appropriate to Russian conditions.
To date the expert committee has defined a set of objectives for the Russian certification programme, analysed the scope of the programme, given preliminary consideration to the institutional framework, and drafted a list of "certification requirements". The committee believes that forest certification could act as an effective tool to improve forest management at the local level and that it could assist the Russian government to prioritise their engagement in forestry activities. Major objectives of the certification programme include:
developing and implementing criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management at forest management unit level.It is envisaged that the programme will encompass sustainable forest management certification at the level of individual forest management units, and forest products certification, including chain of custody audits and labelling. Standards for certification would go beyond the existing legal requirements for forest licenses to encompass a wider range of forest values.ensuring that environmental, social, and economic costs are adequately reflected in the price of forest products.
stimulating the replacement of heavy logging equipment with less environmentally damaging equipment.
encouraging long term forestry management projects and encouraging inward investment into the sector.
The South African timber industry is concerned about certification pressures as the country is a significant exporter of plantation based forest products. The industry has been supporting the initiative within ISO to develop forestry certification under the 14000 series of standards.
Sweden has been very actively involved in certification issues since their inception in the early 1990s. There is now broad support for certification in Sweden as a tool to promote advances in Swedish forest management and to encourage further improvement in management techniques. The industry is backing the introduction of certification as a marketing tool and believes that the certification process should remain free of political influence. However, the existing inter-governmental agreements relating to sustainable forest management (UNCED, Helsinki, Montreal) are regarded as providing a valuable framework for international harmonisation of locally adapted standards. There is a broad consensus that, in order to ensure the credibility of certificates, locally based standards for certification should be drawn up through a participatory approach involving the forestry community working on equal terms with environmental and other interests.
In 1994-95 the forest industry, forest owners, WWF Sweden and the Swedish Nature Conservation Society were involved in discussions with the aim of developing certification criteria for Swedish forests. In May 1995, the two NGOs proposed a set of standards as a starting point for negotiation. The industry responded "positively". stating that the standards were a valuable contribution but that further analysis was needed. Since then a number of Swedish companies and private forest owners have studied the commercial implications of implementing the NGO's standards. Provisional data indicates that timber production would decrease considerably if the standards were introduced in their current form on a national basis - they are therefore unlikely to meet the economic criteria for sustainability.
Tests on certification standards are continuing. In Autumn 1995, the Federation of Forest Owners commissioned the research organisation Skog Forsk to carry out trials on a range of sustainability criteria in three forestry districts of Sweden.
Work has also been carried out to assess the practicalities of chain-of-custody certification. STORA, which is EMAS certified, has studied the implications of establishing the source of raw material for one of its box factories. It was concluded that the existing administrative procedures could account for 80-85% of purchases from individual suppliers, but that problems arose when suppliers were particularly small. STORA and Graninge have recently started a two year project to establish the feasibility of certifying the chain of custody of provisionally certified timber from Swedish forests to DIY stores in the Netherlands, and to assess the market demand for certified timber.
The FSC has been particularly active in Sweden. In February 1995, a FSC National Working Group was established. Initially forest owners were not represented, but they have since joined the initiative. The group intends to prepare a proposal for a Swedish certification system to be put forward for FSC approval. The Swedish industry recently announced its intention to co-operate with the FSC Working Group and to work towards the development of a certification scheme "within the framework of the FSC".
Since the completion of an FSC national consultative process in Switzerland during 1992, work has been underway towards the achievement of timber certification for domestic timber within the framework of the FSC. The work has been carried out with the support and co-operation of the Swiss Government.
In 1994, an FSC core group, comprising representatives from the NGO community and the forest industry, was established to develop national certification arrangements. The group produced proposals for the design of a national certification framework and drew up a set of draft certification standards for Swiss forests. A national FSC office has been proposed.
The draft standards were subsequently tested in the Canton of Solothurn. The study concluded that about 40% of the pilot canton's wood production could be certified immediately, while another 11% could be certified with minor adjustments in management. Attitudes towards the certification programme amongst foresters were generally found to be positive. However, the full cost implications of the standards were not tested.
The Swiss timber trade and industry are generally supportive of timber certification, but are keen to ensure that equivalent certification standards are applied to imported timber so as not to weaken the competitiveness of domestic production. The small size of Swiss forest holdings is also seen as potentially problematic, as the costs of certification may be too great for individual owners to bear The industry therefore favour certification at Canton level, but this approach has been resisted by the NGOs.
Further development of the Swiss scheme will include consultations on the draft standards and practical certification experiments covering both forest management and chain-of-custody certification.
i) Domestic Production
The Forest Industry Committee of Great Britain (FICGB), representing the private sector of the UK forestry industry, in March 1994 announced the introduction of the British Woodmark, The Woodmark, which is essentially aimed at promoting greater use of domestic timber, is a "certificate of origin" scheme which applies to U.K. timber only. Timber products which contain at least 90% domestically produced timber are eligible for the Woodmark label. Consumers are thereby assured that the product contains timber which has been subject to a formal felling licence and managed in accordance with UK forestry standards and regulations. The Woodmark chain of custody system is regularly audited by TRADA Certification Ltd, a member of the National Accreditation Council for Certification Bodies.
The UK Government's Forestry Authority is continuously upgrading its forest management standards, which are applicable to all types of forest land, both public and private, in the U.K. Most recently the Authority has been engaged in the development and refinement of a set of National Forestry Standards which aim to ensure sustainable forestry in the UK and which are compatible with the Helsinki Criteria and Indicators. The Standards, which build on existing forestry and environmental guidelines, are currently in draft form and have been issued to a broad range of organisations for comment. The Standards include an assessment of environmental issues and set out in detail the regulatory and planning framework for forestry operations in the UK. The Standards, which work on the principle that the objectives and management of any forest or woodland should be appropriate to its particular location, also provide further technical guidance for the different categories of forest and forest operations in the U.K.
In order to provide credible assurances that the Forestry Authority is implementing the National Forestry Standards in the UK, an independent audit of the Authority's activities is planned in 1997.
As a separate initiative, the Forest Stewardship Council has established a National Working Group to promote FSC based certification and to develop national standards which are in line with the FSC Principles and Criteria. To date this approach has not found favour with the UK Forestry Commission, forest owners and industry as it is perceived to be unaccountable, costly and to duplicate the existing controls administered by the Forestry Authority. The FSC approach, which relies heavily on expensive "single forest certification", is also seen as inappropriate and prohibitively expensive in a UK context due to the predominance of small private forest owners.
The FSC Group has however drawn up its own set of draft Forestry Standards without the participation of the UK forest owners, professional forestry associations, industry or government. The failure of the FSC to encourage the participation of forest owners and industry, coupled with market studies which have shown that buyers are generally unwilling to pay a premium for certified timber, has meant that few owners have been encouraged to seek FSC certification, and many are actively resisting the process.
To break the deadlock, the FSC have made various approaches to the Forestry Commission in the hope of enlisting their support and to investigate the possibility of certifying state owned forests in the UK. The Commission has not ruled out this possibility, but has stated a number of pre-conditions for any involvement which may lead to FSC certification as follows: i) certification must be nation-wide: ii) standards must be set by the Forestry Commission, not by the FSC; and iii) FSC has no exclusive right to certification. The Commission has also agreed to participate in the consultative process for the FSC draft standards.
ii) Imports
The UK Government has expressed support for the concept of certification, but has stated that it does not believe in legislation to restrict imports to certified products as this practice conflicts with the UNCED Principles, and with GATT and World Trade Organisation rules. The Government therefore favours a wholly voluntary approach to certification. It has not however sought to promote any particular form of certification in overseas supplying countries.
The timber importing sector has consistently supported the concept of timber certification as a mechanism to provide credible guarantees of sound forest management. The Timber Trade Federation has emphasised the importance of ensuring adequate participation by government, forest owners, and industry in the development of certification standards and mechanisms. The Federation has also emphasised the importance of certification being non discriminatory, so that all suppliers are provided with fair opportunities to give a valid response to market demand for certified timber. Against this background, the TTF have called for overseas supplying countries to develop credible national systems of certification which are appropriate to national conditions and needs.
While not strictly speaking a certification scheme, Forests Forever and the Timber Trade Federation have been promoting a scheme which provides timber importing companies with the means to enhance their environmental credentials. Companies are being encouraged to sign an Environmental Policy setting out a formal code of environmental practice and committing them to specific and attainable environmental action. A major aim of the Policy is to ensure timber companies establish as far as possible where their timber derives from, and the nature of forest management at source. It also aims to strengthen communications on environmental matters between individual UK timber companies and their suppliers, and to encourage suppliers to adopt environmental policies and standards. The Policy currently has over 100 signatories.
The UK has been at the forefront of the development of environmental management standards. British Standard 7750, which was released in 1994, is a management standard that allows companies to set their own environmental targets and time frame within which to achieve these targets. The Standard gives the company the systems by which it can monitor its progress towards achieving these targets. BS7750 does not make any stipulations regarding timber sourcing, but these may be added voluntarily by the company seeking certification. A number of UK timber importing companies are currently working towards BS7750 certification.
The WWF and FSC have succeeded in stimulating support for FSC certification within a sector of the UK timber market. A number of large DIY stores and high street retailing companies have perceived that there are marketing advantages to be gained from adherence to an NGO endorsed purchasing policy. Until recently, the WWF's 1995 Plus Group of companies were committed to restricting all timber purchases to FSC certified timber by the year 2000. The Group comprises 68 member companies including large retailers such as Sainsbury, B&Q, WH Smith and Boots the Chemist. The WWF claims that the group accounts for about a quarter of the UK's total consumption of wood products - much of this consumption comprising paper products. While members of the Group have been demanding FSC certified timber "as standard", they have made it clear that they are unwilling to pay more for this timber.
The targets set by the 1995 Plus Group have been broadly criticised by forest owners and industry as being unrealistic, for failing to take into account the very real practical problems of certification, and for excluding other, potentially more reliable, certification schemes. The Timber Trade Federation has recently written to the WWF informing them that, by requiring exclusive commitment to FSC and failing to recognise other forms of environmental certification, the terms of membership of the Group are contrary to the principles of free competition and free movement of goods under both EC and UK law. In response the WWF have reformulated the terms of membership of the Group removing the target date for certification, and providing some scope for other forms of certification. The legal implications of the new terms of membership are currently being considered by the UK's Office of Fair Trading.
i) Producers
In the United States, certification is regarded very much as a voluntary and private sector activity. The US Government, noting that at this stage there is only limited understanding of the complex issues raised by certification, has not stated its support for the concept and has instead urged further study on the design, operation, costs, benefits and market implications of certification schemes.
The US forest products industry has however been quick to respond to the demand for improved information on their forest management practices. In late 1994, the American Forest & Paper Association approved a set of Sustainable Forestry Principles and Guidelines, referred to as the AF&PA Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI). From 1 January 1996, it became a condition of AF&PA membership that members commit to the Principles and Guidelines"- This is a significant development as AF&PA represents around 200 member companies that account for approximately 84% of US paper production, 50% of solid wood production, and 90% of the industrial forest land in the US. The Sustainable Forestry Initiative requires AF&PA members to:
Broaden the practice of sustainable forestry by employing an array of scientifically, environmentally, and economically sound practices in the growth, harvest and use of forests Promptly reforest harvested areas to ensure long term forest productivity and forest resource conservation.AF&PA's Principles and Guidelines include a set of performance measures that companies are required to adopt so that the AF&PA can assess their members compliance. AF&PA issues an annual report to the public on their members performance. An advisory group of independent experts including representatives of government agencies, academia and conservation groups assists in the preparation of this report and validate the conclusions.Protect water quality in watercourses by establishing riparian protection measures based on soil type, terrain, vegetation, and other applicable factors and use Best Management Practices approved by the federal Environmental Protection Agency.
Enhance the quality of wildlife habitat and contribute to biodiversity.
Minimise visual impact by designing harvests to blend into the terrain, by restricting clearcut size and/or using harvesting methods that promote the diversity of forest cover.Manage company lands of ecological, geological, or historical significance in a manner that accounts for their special qualities.
Improve forest utilisation to help ensure the most efficient use of the resource.
Broaden the practice of sustainable forestry by working with non industrial landowners. Publicly report progress in fulfilling their commitment to sustainable forestry on an annual basis.
Provide opportunities for the public and the forestry community to participate in the AF&PA's members commitment to sustainable forestry.
The industry has also taken considerable interest in the development of ISO14001 and has been playing an active role in the deliberations of the International Study Group established to consider the application of the standard within the forest sector. It is likely that the ISO14001 approach will be the industry's preferred method of certifying sustainable forestry in the US.
Environmental NGOs in the US have been backing the development of FSC certification within the United States, but progress and participation have so far been very limited. The various schemes have been regional in scope. In the Lake States region, a consultative exercise was undertaken in 1993, and a regional working group has been formed. A set of draft regional standards have been developed by the Sigurd Olsen Institute, but with very limited participation from relevant interest a groups, notably forest owners and industry. In the Pacific Northwest, a number of "information" meetings on certification have been held and a working group formed comprised mainly of commercial certifying organisations. A similar initiative is also reported in New England.
Despite the lack of FSC forest management standards for the US, the FSC has endorsed a number of certifications undertaken by FSC accredited certifiers to their own standards. In May 1996, the total area of FSC endorsed certified forest in the US amounted to 658, 000 hectares (about 0.33% of US timberland). Over half of this area consisted of one large property in Maine.
ii) Consumers
The International Wood Products Association, a grouping of tropical importers in the US, has established a Certification Working Group to evaluate various certification schemes around the world to assess their impact on the timber trade. The Tropical Forest Foundation also has a committee which deals withcertification. The Foundation identifies and publicises operators of excellence who can serve as models for other producers.
5. Other lnternational Institutions Activities
Centre for lnternational Forestry Research (CIFOR)
CIFOR, an international organisation based in Indonesia, has been collaborating with several government and non government organisations, in co-ordinating work on the testing of criteria and indicators for the sustainable management of forests at the forest management unit level. CIFOR has used various criteria and indicators for certification, including those developed by the Initiative Tropenwald, the Dutch Working Group, the LEI in Indonesia, Smart Wood in the USA, the Soil Association's Woodmark, and the African Timber Organisation's Green Label. The criteria developed under the Helsinki Process have also been tested. Tests have been carried out in Austria, the Cote d'lvoire and Germany. Boreal forests have not yet been included.
The purpose of CIFOR's testing program has been to identify a minimum number of reliable indicators to measure eco-system integrity and the achievement of social objectives. It appears that the final outcome will be a "tool kit" to allow the development of criteria and indicators for certification, rather than the harmonisation of certification criteria.
Future CIFOR activity in this area will include additional field tests of certification standards, The tests would also be broadened to include consideration of the economic effects of certification and methods of certifying different ownership structures.
International Tropical Timber Organisation (ITTO)
ITTO's ground breaking work in the early 1990s to develop guidelines and criteria for the sustainable management of tropical forests, has provided a firm basis on which to compile an internationally agreed set of Principles and Criteria for tropical forest certification. ITTO members have not yet agreed on the exact role they wish ITTO to play in forest management certification, although it is very unlikely that ITTO would take on the role of a certification body. Members have however instructed ITTO to continue to monitor forest management certification initiatives and their impacts on member countries, to inform members of developments, and to act as a forum in which the issue can be discussed. ITTO have undertaken two studies in order to draw up an inventory and monitor the development of all labelling and certification schemes.
Inter-governmental Panel On Forests
The Inter-governmental Panel on Forests was established following the third session of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development held in New York in 1995. One of the main aims of the session was to evaluate the progress countries had made in implementing the 1992 UNCED Forest Principles. White commending the various inter-governmental initiatives following UNCED (for example the Montreal and Helsinki Processes), the Commission agreed that more focus and action was required. It therefore established the lnter-Governmental Panel on Forests (IPF) to promote further action at the international level compatible with the UNCED Principles. The Panel is composed of representatives of UNCSD member governments, but the full range of countries and interest groups are able to participate as observers. One of the items on the IPF's work program is to "examine the issue of voluntary certification with regard to the sustainable management of forests, including the impact of certification on developing countries". The Panel aims to make "substantive progress towards consensus within its mandate". The Panel is to meet four times between 1995 and 1997 and to present a report to the fifth session of the UNCSD in that year. There had been some optimism that the IPF could lead ultimately to a legally binding Forest Convention, including inter-governmental agreement on forest management certification, but this looks unlikely at this stage.
World Bank
The World Bank is constrained in its ability to support forest management certification initiatives directly as it works through governments, and needs to receive a specific request to assist in the development of certification systems before it can act, So far it has received only one such request to support Indonesia in the establishment of the Eco-labelling Institute, LEI, which was funded through an IDF grant. The Bank has also published a number of papers to assess the global implications of certification.
FAO
In February 1995, FAO hosted an Expert Meeting on the Harmonisation of Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management. Major objectives of the meeting were to review, discuss and report on:
i) the content and coverage of international initiatives aimed at formulating sustainable forest management criteria and indicators.
ii) the conditions for sustainable forest management in those countries not currently covered by these initiatives
iii) the issues involved in converging the various initiatives
iv) the mechanism, and possible time frame, for action that would lead to convergence of the various initiatives. The findings of the meeting were issued in a report entitled the "Harmonisation of Criteria and Indicators For Sustainable Forest Management".Immediately after the Expert Meeting, FAO hosted a Ministerial Meeting on Forestry, the first within the framework of FAO. The meeting, which was timed to occur just prior to the UNCSD meeting in April 1995, was intended to highlight the importance of forestry to sustainable development and to increase the level of political support for the UNCED Forest Principles. The Ministers reaffirmed their commitment to implement the UNCED Principles, and called on FAO to devote more resources to forestry development in member countries. FAO would also be expected to play a central role in the IPF.
More recently, FAO has initiated several regional processes to facilitate the development of sustainable forestry criteria and indicators in countries not covered by other initiatives, for example in many African countries with dryland forest.
Appendix 1: Terms used in association with certification
Accreditation
Procedure by which an authoritative body gives formal recognition that a body or person is competent to carry out certification.
Standard
Documented ag reements containing technical specifications to be used consistently as rules, guidelines, or definitions of characteristics, to ensure that materials, products, processes and services are fit for their purpose.
Guidelines
Overall directives which encompass and generally describe Principles and Criteria
Principle
Key elements of a standard that define its scope
Criteria
Key elements defining a principle.
Indicator
A variable that can be used to measure a particular criterion.
Performance Standard
A standard which specifies the results that an organisation must achieve, but not the methods by which these results are to be achieved.
Procedural/management Standard
A standard which specifies the management processes which an organisation must adopt to ensure it is capable of achieving specified results.
For further information send email to Graham Bruford [email protected]