Publication: Does forest certification in developing countries have environmental benefits? Insights from Mexican corrective action requests.
Does forest certification in developing countries have environmental benefits? Insights from Mexican corrective action requests.
| dc.contributor.author | Blackman, A. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Cubbage, F.W. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-01-23T18:55:19Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-01-23T18:55:19Z | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://open.fsc.org/handle/resource/551 | |
| dc.title | Does forest certification in developing countries have environmental benefits? Insights from Mexican corrective action requests. | en |
| dcterms.accessRights | Public | |
| dcterms.accessRights | Limited access | |
| dcterms.bibliographicCitation | Blackman, A. et al. 2017. Does forest certification in developing countries have environmental benefits? Insights from Mexican corrective action requests. International Forestry Review. | en |
| dcterms.issued | 2017 | |
| dcterms.language | en | |
| dcterms.type | Journal Article | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| fsc.evidenceCategory | FSC impact-related | |
| fsc.focus.forestZone | Temperate | |
| fsc.focus.forestZone | Tropical | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Economic | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Environmental | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Social | |
| fsc.focus.tenureManagement | Community | |
| fsc.focus.tenureOwnership | Community | |
| fsc.issue.environmental | Deforestation, tree cover loss | |
| fsc.subject | Deforestation | |
| fsc.subject | Tree cover loss | |
| is.availability.fullText | Full text available | |
| is.contributor.member | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.coverage.country | Mexico | |
| is.coverage.countryAlpha2 | MX | |
| is.coverage.region | North America | |
| is.evaluation.collection | CAR analysis | |
| is.evaluation.collection | Mixed methods | |
| is.evaluation.counterfacts | No | |
| is.evaluation.notes | CAR-analysis for all FM CHs in Mexico (n=35). Quite a quantitative focus on the CARs with little qualitative analysis (nr of CARS issues, nr of CARs closed, major/minor CARs, time needed for CARs to be addressed etc.) | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "Compared to Latin America and Southeast Asia, little effort has been devoted to empirically studying conditions under which communities have achieved and maintained forest management goals through their stewardship, including certification to achieve their livelihoods in Africa." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "Of the sampled households, 92% were engaged in agriculture as their main livelihood activity with higher income than from other sources, followed by forest income, whereby households in villages managing FSC-certified forests earned higher income than those in villages managing non-FSC-certified forests." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "Forest incomes contributed about 12% and 6% for FSC-certified and non-FSC-certified forests to total household income, respectively. ["] The average daily income at household level from all the income sources was US$ 2.86 and US$ 1.94 for FSC and non-FSC, respectively ["] the FSC regime was significantly and positively related to household forest income. Conversely, household size, age and education are shown to have had an insignificant influence" | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "The revenues in villages managing FSC- certified forests were used more for forest management and community development projects than in the villages managing non-FSC-certified" | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "There was a significant relationship between forest certification and forest governance and institutions implementation (Table 7). Awareness and effectiveness of forest bylaws were significantly higher in villages managing FSC-certified forests than in non-FSC, making bylaws enforcement ineffective in the latter." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "In non-FSC-certified forest timber dealers used their own trained teams (with low wages) from outside the villages to avoid risks and costs associated with training new teams in every village. Thus, villagers in villages managing non-FSC-certified forests mostly did not receive the forest income from timber dealers of which they deserved." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "forest certification allowed all stakeholders in villages managing FSC-certified forests to engage in a process to identify their concerns and needs with respect to forest resources management, through the process of forest management planning." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "The continuous training in the villages managing FSC-certified forests empowered the villagers with entrepreneurial and conservation agriculture skills, resulting to higher income from agriculture and wages than in villages managing non-FSC-certified forests. This could explain why the income is skewed on agriculture and wages in villages managing FSC-certified forests (Table 4) because more villagers (61%) used fertilisers to increase crop production than villagers (39%) from villages managing non-FSC-certified forests." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "The present study's findings suggest that FSC enhances labour conditions and employment opportunities for both men and women, with relatively better remuneration." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "Results show that, FSC-certified community forest operations are positively related to communities' socioeconomic improvement (Table 4), which could be attributed to the benefits certification brings, i.e. transparent procedure in collective action, power relations and accountability." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "These findings suggest that villages managing FSC-certified forests demonstrate good forest governance which creates an enabling environment (i.e. consensus in decision making) that positively influences villages and villagers' livelihood conditions." | |
| is.evaluation.scope | A peer-reviewed version of the paper has been published in 2017 in International Forestry Review. It does not contain new data but refined analysis and interpretation. | |
| is.evidenceSubType | Monitoring report - performance | |
| is.evidenceType | Monitoring report | |
| is.focus.sectors | Agriculture | |
| is.focus.sectors | Forestry | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Economic | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Environmental | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Social | |
| is.focus.systemElement | MandE outcomes and impacts | |
| is.focus.systemElement | MandE performance monitoring | |
| is.identifier.code | Impacts | |
| is.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.1505/146554817821865072 | |
| is.identifier.fscdoi | http://dx.doi.org/10.34800/fsc-international372 | |
| is.identifier.schemeName | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.identifier.schemeType | Voluntary Sustainability Standards | |
| is.item.reviewStatus | Peer reviewed | |
| is.journalName | International Forestry Review |