Publication: Indirect Impacts of Certification on Tropical Forest Management and Public Policies
Indirect Impacts of Certification on Tropical Forest Management and Public Policies
| dc.contributor.author | Viana, V. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-01-23T18:55:40Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-01-23T18:55:40Z | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://open.fsc.org/handle/resource/630 | |
| dc.title | Indirect Impacts of Certification on Tropical Forest Management and Public Policies | en |
| dcterms.abstract | Forest certification has been conceived as a new instrument to promote sound forest management practices in all forest types, ranging from boreal to tropical rainforests (Viana et al. 1996; de Camino and Alfaro 1998; Bass 2000). In the process of structuring the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), it was hypothesized that forest certification would become a catalyst of change of tropical forest management (Viana 1995). The objective of this paper is to assess this prediction in relation to natural forest management. | en |
| dcterms.accessRights | Public | |
| dcterms.accessRights | Open access | |
| dcterms.bibliographicCitation | Viana, V., 2003. Indirect impacts of certification on tropical forest management and public policies. Social and political dimensions of forest certification. | en |
| dcterms.issued | 2003 | |
| dcterms.language | en | |
| dcterms.license | Copyrighted; all rights reserved | en |
| dcterms.publisher | Forstbuch | |
| dcterms.type | Book Chapter | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| fsc.evidenceCategory | FSC impact-related | |
| fsc.focus.forestType | Natural Forest | |
| fsc.focus.forestZone | Tropical | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Political, legal, systemic | |
| fsc.issue.social | Local communities | |
| fsc.issue.social | Indigenous peoples | |
| fsc.subject | Forests | |
| fsc.subject | Certification | |
| fsc.topic.political | Governance | |
| fsc.topic.political | National Forest Policy | |
| fsc.topic.political | Spillover | |
| fsc.topic.social | Consultation, participation, empowerment | |
| is.availability.fullText | Full text available | |
| is.contributor.funderType | Private funds (NGOs, companies, VSS self-funded etc) | |
| is.contributor.member | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.coverage.country | Brazil | |
| is.coverage.countryAlpha2 | BR | |
| is.coverage.geographicLevel | Country | |
| is.coverage.latitude | -14.235004 | |
| is.coverage.longitude | -51.92528 | |
| is.coverage.region | South America | |
| is.evaluation.collection | Interviews/surveys with certified entities and their representatives and workers/producers | |
| is.evaluation.counterfacts | No | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | There are several categories of indirect impacts of certification: (i) institutional policies and roles, (ii) dialog and partnerships, (iii) funding for forest-oriented activities, (iv) investment in forest technologies, (v) private sector investment, (vi) community investment. The main objective of this study is to analyze the indirect impacts of certification. | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | To the private companies certification represents a risk reduction factor. The likelihood of encountering social and political problems with local communities and environmental groups is perceived as smaller in certified operations than in non-certified ones. In the case governmental agencies. In addition, there are the potential financial gains that can be derived from certification in terms of market access, corporate image, prices and staff morale. This perceived lower risk increases the willingness to invest in forest-related activities and programs. | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | In the case of government staff and elected officials, certification is seen as a way to reduce potential criticism by environmental and social movements regarding forest management. Many governmental agencies have moved from a period of strong resistance to outside control to awareness of the potential benefits of certification in reducing monitoring costs and in promoting sound forest management systems. There are several cases where certification has become an explicit public policy instrument. | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | Certification has acted as a risk reduction factor to decision-makers. Political leaders, especially those committed to sustainable development policies, are often unwilling to take the risk of developing policies to encourage forest management. Forest management is seen as a complicated issue, with great potential for criticism from environmental NGOs andsocial movements. There is also a lack of success stories on which to base policies. Certification reduces the perception of risk for political leaders as it brings broad support from a variety of stakeholders related to forestry. Certification also enhances recognition of the management capacity of forest communities (von Kruedener 1997). | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | Institutional policies of NGOs towards forest management have altered dramatically and a great deal of this change results from the certification. Several environmental NGOs have come from a paradigm of promoting conservation through strict nature protection only. In many cases, there was little understanding of the potential of forest management as a part of a broad conservation strategy. Certification has given an opportunity to international NGOs to change paradigms and institutional policies towards forest management. | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | The impacts of certification on fostering dialogue have spread beyond the scope of FSC-related activities and have fueled greater participation in the process of formulating public policies | |
| is.evidenceSubType | Descriptive information - contextual and operational | |
| is.evidenceType | Descriptive information | |
| is.focus.products | Timber products | |
| is.focus.sdg | SDG 15 - Life on Land | |
| is.focus.sectors | Agriculture | |
| is.focus.sectors | Forestry | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Social | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Environmental | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Economic | |
| is.focus.sustainIssue | Participant costs and benefits | |
| is.focus.sustainIssue | Livelihoods | |
| is.focus.sustainIssue | Rights of indigenous peoples and local communities | |
| is.focus.sustainIssue | Forests and other ecosystems | |
| is.focus.sustainLens | Audits and assurance | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Market access | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Price premiums | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Training | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Land tenure | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Governance mechanisms | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Deforestation and forest protection | |
| is.focus.systemElement | MandE outcomes and impacts | |
| is.focus.systemElement | MandE performance monitoring | |
| is.identifier.code | Impacts | |
| is.identifier.doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.34800/fsc-international358 | |
| is.identifier.schemeName | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.identifier.schemeType | Voluntary Sustainability Standards | |
| is.link.url | https://www.ife.uni-freiburg.de/dateien/pdf-dateien/social-and-political-dimensions-2003 |