Certification in the forest political landscape

dc.contributor.authorBass, S.
dc.titleCertification in the forest political landscapeen
dcterms.accessRightsOpen access
dcterms.bibliographicCitationBass, S., 2003. Certification in the forest political landscape. Social and Political Dimensions of Forest Certification. Forstbuch, pp.27-59en
dcterms.licenseCopyrighted; all rights reserveden
dcterms.publisherUniversity of Buffalo
dcterms.typeBook Chapter
fsc.evidenceCategoryFSC impact-related
fsc.focus.sustainDimensionPolitical, legal, systemic
fsc.issue.environmentalSoil and water
fsc.topic.politicalNon-State Market Regulation
fsc.topic.politicalNational Forest Policy
is.availability.fullTextFull text available
is.contributor.funderTypeMixed sources
is.contributor.memberForest Stewardship Council
is.evaluation.collectionLiterature review
is.evaluation.quotesThe study showed that the alliances among producers, marketing firms and NGOs involved in certification in Madre de Dios have not brought the economic empowerment outcomes (increased assets, capabilities and freedom to make economic choices) that were originally expected. However, these alliances have helped increase the castañeros' political empowerment (giving them a voice and increased self-confidence in their ability to effect change) by strengthening their collective social and political capital.
is.evaluation.quotesBoth FSC standards (Klooster, 2005; Taylor, 2005b) and sanitary standards for organic-certified products (Quaedvlieg, 2009) tend to become requirements for accessing the market rather than opportunities to obtain a premium price. At best, the acquired skills mean that producers are able to maintain access to mainstream markets.
is.evaluation.quotesThose involved in FSC certification also learned to improve forest management and reduce negative environmental impacts
is.evaluation.quotesHigher costs due to the adaptation of production processes and high assessment and auditing costs are not compensated by sufficient price premiums for producers, while a lack of ecological information, production capacity, processing technology, managerial skills and distribution channels, high transportation costs to reach markets, a lack of appropriate standards and market information, and limited markets for certified products are additional hindrances. FSC certification (forest certification) is generally said to be more demanding and expensive than organic or Fairtrade (product) certification, while premium prices are lower. The decision ofASCART to desist from FSC certification is not unique and has also been reported for Amazon nut producers in Bolivia and maple syrup producers in Rupert, Vermont (US) (Pierce in Shanley et al., 2008: 11e12).
is.evaluation.quotesThe results show that certification has thus far had limited effects on castañeros' material assets (financial and physical capital)and also that Amazon nut certification does not necessarily represent an economic improvement for producers in the Amazon nut sector of Madre de Dios. Amazon nut certification would not have been possible without the support of NGOs and international donors. This corresponds with the obstacles to smallholder and community certification identified by Klooster (2005), Molnar (2003), Pattberg (2006) and Shanley et al. (2008).
is.evaluation.quotesTheir production and management skills improved, however. Producers have learned the importance of product quality and how to improve it in order to meet international market standards. In particular, NGOs provided training in handling the Amazon nuts according to more sanitary practices such as separating their garbage and transporting and drying their Amazon nuts in a clean and ventilated manner. Those involved in FSC certification also learned to improve forest management and reducenegative environmental impacts, while those who participated in an Internal Control Group learned to monitor whether the association members complied with the FSC standards.
is.evaluation.quotesForest management certification was introduced into this political landscape to serve two basic purposes: to improve forest management - and particularly the multiple public benefits - through market-based incentives; and to improve market access and share for the products of such management.
is.evaluation.quotesRAMETSTEINER (2000) observes that certification's biggest role in policy change has been to heighten general awareness of SFM and of the roles of other stakeholders. This awareness seems to derive more from the multi-stakeholder processes of developing standards, thanfrom the cumulative impacts of individual certificates
is.evaluation.quotesCertification (and FSC in particular) has helped to clarify, systematise and apply precise forest management standards for real production and trade contexts.
is.evidenceSubTypeSynthesis paper - literature review
is.evidenceTypeSynthesis paper
is.focus.productsForestry products
is.focus.sdgSDG 15 - Life on Land
is.focus.sdgSDG 17 - Partnerships for the Goals
is.focus.sustainIssueForests and other ecosystems
is.focus.sustainIssueParticipant costs and benefits
is.focus.sustainIssueRights of indigenous peoples and local communities
is.focus.sustainLensAudits and assurance
is.focus.sustainLensTransnational governance
is.focus.sustainLensSupply chain benefits
is.focus.sustainLensJurisdictional approaches
is.focus.sustainOutcomeDeforestation and forest protection
is.focus.sustainOutcomeMarket access
is.focus.sustainOutcomeCost of inputs
is.focus.sustainOutcomeGovernance mechanisms
is.focus.systemElementMandE outcomes and impacts
is.focus.systemElementMandE performance monitoring
is.identifier.schemeNameForest Stewardship Council
is.identifier.schemeNameProgramme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification
is.identifier.schemeTypeVoluntary Sustainability Standards
is.item.reviewStatusPeer reviewed