10 minute read
FSC plans to double share in global timber trade by 2020 (Part 2
22 ENVIRONMENT FSC PLANS
TO DOUBLE SHARE IN GLOBAL TIMBER TRADE BY 2020 (PART 2)
By Danii Farniev Lesnaya Industriya Journal
In the second part of Lesnaya Industriya’s interview with Kim Carstensen, director general of FSC, Carstensen shared more on FSC’s certifi cation process and the various FSC bodies that help to resolve diff erent issues that may arise, be it accusations from the public or even dissociating itself from companies they think have signifi cant reputational problems. He also answered to critics who think that standards of the FSC system are not strict enough.
How many affi liated companies does FSC have and what do they do?
KC: FSC AC, based in Mexico, is our mother organisation. It manages the membership of the whole organisation, facilitates conversations among members, owns the brand, and determines the direction of the organisation and the definition of our principles and criteria. Under FSCAC, we have multiple subsidiary units. One of them is FSC Global Development, an important taxpayer in Germany that provides market and trade development related services to certifi cate holding members. Another of our non-profi t organisations, FSC International Centre, is composed of technical experts that manage the rules, principles and criteria. In addition, we own an independent organisation called ASI (Accreditation Services International) that manages a system of auditors. It oversees the quality of audits and checks whether the auditors have the necessary qualifi cations to act on behalf of the organisation.
How does FSC help in the reduction of tropical forests?
KC: In certified tropical forests, of which there are about 20 million hectares around the world, we see a lot of positive benefi ts like decreases in poor forest management practices and far less deforestation. For example, from a biodiversity perspective, the presence of important jaguar populations has been recently documented within FSC certifi ed operations in Central and South America. Independent research from the Centre for International Forestry Research has also shown that our operations have positive social impacts. This centre did a study of the social conditions of the people living in or around FSC certifi ed forests in the Congo basin. They found that no matter what social indicators they looked at, living conditions were better in FSC certifi ed operations than in non-FSC certifi ed forests. Researchers looked at indicators like access to clean water, sanitation, general health, education, etc. Everything was in favour of FSC certifi ed forests.
What proportion of all tropical forests is currently certifi ed?
KC: About 10 per cent of the FSC certifi ed forests are natural forests in the tropics. That’s about 20 million hectares, which unfortunately is still quite a small proportion of the total forest area in the tropics. In addition to that, there are also certifi ed plantations in tropical countries that bring important volumes of forest products to global markets.
In the months leading up to 2020, how does the FSC intend to increase the amount of certifi ed tropical forests?
KC: We are currently working with our partners in Brazil, Indonesia and Congo to develop new FSC standards to make the certifi cation process easier and more eff ective. We have also begun working with partners in Europe, North America, and Japan to increase market interest and develop market tools that can help certifi ed products enter the market. We hope that this will lead to improvements. We also work with indigenous peoples and strive to respect the rights that they have to natural forests. We work with indigenous peoples’ organisations from all over the world to make sure that FSC is a useful tool for them in terms of the management of a forest and also in terms of the market access.
causing destruction in the Russian taiga, in particular in the Dvina forest. How valid are these charges?
KC: We have had long discussions about the protection of intact forest landscapes, in particular in the forests in Archangelsk, Far East, and Siberia. In 2014, our members created rules to address the protection of intact forests. These rules are now in place globally and provide a moratorium that protects at least 80 per cent of these intact landscapes inside the forests certifi ed by FSC. In Russia, moratoria in FSC, the certifi ed forest managing companies have agreed to set aside 1.2 million hectares of intact forest landscapes for protection.
We have had discussions with the government of Archangelsk and forest management companies and groups, including the WWF and Greenpeace, on how this idea of moratoria can be strengthened. It would be ideal if these moved beyond just being commitments by the certifi ed companies to becoming government protected areas, which would of course provide stronger protection. But this is something we are unable to do on our own. We need to work with partners, particularly with the government. Therefore, I was very happy to see the recent joint announcement by two large forest companies in Arkhangelsk, Greenpeace, and WWF that they have agreed to establish a large protected area in the Dvinskoy forest. This is a very important development, and I believe FSC certifi cation has played a major role in making it possible.
Does this mean that Greenpeace's accusations against your organisation are unfair?
KC: Greenpeace is demanding more protection. From my understanding, Greenpeace would like to stop the logging of intact landscapes, and this goes further than our rules. However, we do agree that new protected areas need to be established. As we have seen in Arkhangelsk, there are good initiatives under way that can help make this happen.
Recently, American company Lumber Liquidators pleaded guilty to smuggling timber -- with the help of a FSC certifi ed Chinese company Xinjia – from the forest in the Far East of Russia. A similar situation occurred in Peru. Can these incidents be attributed to the imperfection of the certifi cation mechanism? KC: I would like to say that it demonstrates the opposite. The fact is that these incidents are a sign that the system works. We have 1,500 forest management certifi cations and 33,000 chain of custody certifi cates worldwide. Of course, there will be mistakes. There are people who cheat or try to avoid our rules, but we have a very elaborate system of managing this. Firstly, the certifi cates are checked and audited regularly. If detected irregularities are not addressed, certifi cates can be suspended. On our website,
you can consult our public data base of all the certifi cates that have been issued worldwide. There are 17 pages of suspended certifi cates. 17 pages account for about 800 to 900 certifi cates, which is a signifi cant number of suspended certifi cates. We also receive and process complaints from NGO, individuals, and other companies that detect irregularities. If some violations are confi rmed, we either suspend or terminate the certifi cate.
Does FSC support accused companies that it has certifi ed?
KC: We have a dispute system that assesses the validity of complaints. If there is enough evidence, we will take action against a company. However, we receive many invalid complaints. In such cases, we will continue to support the company, communicate with them, and maintain their certifi cate.
How often does the FSC suspend certifi cates and under what circumstances?
KC: I mentioned before that we have 800 to 900 suspended certificates. If we find, during the audit and complaint management processes, that the certifi cate is not well managed and does not fulfi l all our rules, we usually suspend or terminate it. We also have a specifi c policy called "the policy for association". This policy allows us to disassociate ourselves from companies which we think create or have signifi cant reputational problems. For example, we disassociated our organisation from the company Asia Pulp and Paper because it established plantations that were destroying rainforests.
Their actions and environmental irresponsibility were found to be contrary to our principles. Recently we disassociated from the Schweighofer Group from Austria as a result of a complaint that had been fi led against it. After closely investigating the complaint, we found suffi cient evidence to conclude that the company had been involved with illegal timber in Romania. We faced a similar situation with Vietnam Rubber Group (VRG) which had illegally destroyed thousands of acres of forests for rubber plantations in Cambodia. If company does something unacceptable under our rules, we will choose to not be associated with them at all.
Are there cases where logging companies have gotten FSC certifi cation to work in one forest then used it to work in other forests without taking into account the ecological compatibility or legality?
KC: They cannot do that. A certifi cate is tied to one specifi c location - big or small – and you cannot use the certifi cate for other locations. This is completely against our rules, and if someone tries to do that, we will immediately terminate the certifi cate.
How does the FSC secretariat supervise the certifi cation bodies that are responsible for issuing certifi cates on behalf of FSC? How well does this control system work?
KC: They are controlled by ASI, which is independent and has the task of authorising through accreditating the certifi cation bodies, and overseeing their performance. Each of these bodies is checked annually for their audit work. ASI also has a system that reports incidents. If a person goes to a certifi ed forest and fi nds irregularities in the way it is managed, this can be reported as an incident to ASI. They will then check it in the next audit or earlier if is a major off ence.
What measures are in place to prevent errors in the audit?
KC: Of course, there may be errors, as in any system. Recently we investigated allegations that an auditor had been bribed by a company. We immediately started an investigation to evaluate the validity of the complaint. In this case it was not valid, but if the suspicions had been confi rmed, we would have suspended the certifi cate immediately.
How are investigations conducted?
KC: It depends on each specifi c case. For instance, if someone said "I believe that this certifi cate was given on a wrong basis, the auditor had been bribed", we would talk to the auditors, the company, and all people involved. We would also look for irregularities within audit reports. If we fi nd there are some issues, we try to get a fi nancial auditor to check the whole system.
Can an accused company appeal the decision of a certifi cation body?
KC: Yes it is possible. Appeals will be looked at fi rst by the certifi cation body, but if the complainant is still not satisfi ed, the appeal will end up with ASI. If that is not suffi cient, appeals and complaints can end up with FSC for the fi nal decision.
Critics of FSC note that the standards of the organisation are not strict enough. They also note that the organisation cannot infl uence illegal land use change. What is your response to such critique?
KC: Our standards are built upon a compromise decision between social, environmental and economic interests. Not all of our stakeholders will be fully satisfi ed. Environmental organisations often feel that their demands are not suffi ciently met, and the same is true of social groups. Therefore, there will always be someone who thinks that our system is not strict enough. On the other hand, there will always be others who consider our rules to be too strict, and these are often those with economic interests. All sides have to concede to a certain extent. It is very important to the FSC system that its rules and standards refl ect the political and technical priorities of the diff erent groups that it works with.
How do you see FSC in 5 years?
KC: Based on our global plan, we will move forward in improving our system for small forest managers and tropical forests. Through that, we hope to see a market increase in the level of certification. We will also have better tools and ways to demonstrate the impact of certifi cation. We are in the process of increasing transparency by sharing maps and other information about the performance of certifi ed areas. We are going to improve the digitisation of our system. ℗
