Publication: Certification in the forest political landscape
Certification in the forest political landscape
| dc.contributor.author | Bass, S. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-01-23T18:56:52Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-01-23T18:56:52Z | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://open.fsc.org/handle/resource/844 | |
| dc.title | Certification in the forest political landscape | en |
| dcterms.accessRights | Public | |
| dcterms.accessRights | Open access | |
| dcterms.bibliographicCitation | Bass, S., 2003. Certification in the forest political landscape. Social and Political Dimensions of Forest Certification. Forstbuch, pp.27-59 | en |
| dcterms.issued | 2003 | |
| dcterms.language | en | |
| dcterms.license | Copyrighted; all rights reserved | en |
| dcterms.publisher | University of Buffalo | |
| dcterms.type | Book Chapter | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| fsc.evidenceCategory | FSC impact-related | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Political, legal, systemic | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Economic | |
| fsc.issue.environmental | Soil and water | |
| fsc.subject | Forests | |
| fsc.subject | Certification | |
| fsc.topic.political | Non-State Market Regulation | |
| fsc.topic.political | National Forest Policy | |
| is.availability.fullText | Full text available | |
| is.contributor.funderType | Mixed sources | |
| is.contributor.member | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.evaluation.collection | Literature review | |
| is.evaluation.counterfacts | No | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | The 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.quotes | Both 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.quotes | Those involved in FSC certification also learned to improve forest management and reduce negative environmental impacts | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | Higher 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.quotes | The 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.quotes | Their 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.quotes | Forest 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.quotes | RAMETSTEINER (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.quotes | Certification (and FSC in particular) has helped to clarify, systematise and apply precise forest management standards for real production and trade contexts. | |
| is.evidenceSubType | Synthesis paper - literature review | |
| is.evidenceType | Synthesis paper | |
| is.focus.products | Forestry products | |
| is.focus.sdg | SDG 15 - Life on Land | |
| is.focus.sdg | SDG 17 - Partnerships for the Goals | |
| is.focus.sectors | Agriculture | |
| is.focus.sectors | Forestry | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Economic | |
| is.focus.sustainIssue | Forests and other ecosystems | |
| is.focus.sustainIssue | Participant costs and benefits | |
| is.focus.sustainIssue | Rights of indigenous peoples and local communities | |
| is.focus.sustainLens | Audits and assurance | |
| is.focus.sustainLens | Transnational governance | |
| is.focus.sustainLens | Supply chain benefits | |
| is.focus.sustainLens | Jurisdictional approaches | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Deforestation and forest protection | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Market access | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Cost of inputs | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Governance mechanisms | |
| 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-international371 | |
| is.identifier.schemeName | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.identifier.schemeName | Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification | |
| is.identifier.schemeType | Voluntary Sustainability Standards | |
| is.item.reviewStatus | Peer reviewed | |
| is.link.url | http://web2.law.buffalo.edu/faculty/meidinger/certsem/Bass.pdf |