Publication: Can Certification Transform Globalized Markets? The environmental certification of forests in Mexico
Can Certification Transform Globalized Markets? The environmental certification of forests in Mexico
| dc.contributor.author | Klooster, D. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-01-23T18:57:40Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-01-23T18:57:40Z | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://open.fsc.org/handle/resource/966 | |
| dc.title | Can Certification Transform Globalized Markets? The environmental certification of forests in Mexico | en |
| dcterms.accessRights | Public | |
| dcterms.accessRights | Limited access | |
| dcterms.bibliographicCitation | Klooster, D. (2006) Can Certification Transform Globalized Markets? The Environmental Certification of Forests in Mexico. III International Congress of the SIAL network. Food and Territories. Baeza. (Ja'n, Espa'a), October 18 to 21, 2006. | en |
| dcterms.issued | 2006 | |
| dcterms.language | en | |
| dcterms.type | Conference Paper | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| fsc.evidenceCategory | FSC impact-related | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Political, legal, systemic | |
| fsc.issue.environmental | Forest disturbance, forest degradation | |
| fsc.subject | Forest management | |
| fsc.subject | Forests | |
| fsc.subject | Certification | |
| fsc.subject | FSC | |
| fsc.subject | Certfor | |
| fsc.subject | Evaluation | |
| fsc.subject | Impacts | |
| is.availability.fullText | Full text available | |
| is.contributor.member | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.coverage.country | Mexico | |
| is.coverage.countryAlpha2 | MX | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | Actors from certified forest communities were found to earn higher income than those from non-FSC forests, and experience significantly greater income equity. This finding suggests that forest certification is an important forest management approach in enhancing equity in income distribution among the actors. | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | However, the sustainability of this income and its distribution will depend on how much the communities will continue to earn and become independent in income, and stop depending on external financial support from MCDI for covering certification costs as is the case at present. | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | From a market perspective, certification should lead to a price premiums which could pay for the incremental cost of good stewardship by the owner and producer, and for the certification costs (Meijaard et al. 2014). However, this is contrary to what happens in Kilwa. FSC villages are not receiving any price premiums for their logs. This is attributed to several factors, including: village communities not having direct access to international markets where their forest products fetch price premiums; customers' preference for certified forest products in Tanzania is still low due to inadequate awareness of forest certification; inadequate use of efficient processing facilities for forest products due to lack of capital, resulting in the low levels of value addition; and forest products costs being relatively higher than the prices offered by the market due to floor price setting by the government, leading to owners and producers not obtaining higher prices compared to costs incurred during production, processing and trading of their forest products. | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | This suggests that higher net revenue earned by FSC villages is not only an incentive for them to maintain the certificate; but also for non-FSC villages to set aside their village forest reserves under CBFM and certify them to benefit communities and individuals as a result of forest certification. Studies by Karmann and Smith (2009) and Pinto and McDermott (2013) identified that social impacts of FSC include material benefits for workers such as employment of local workers with higher wages and improved workers training. The present study shows similar results where SWI (FSC) recruits villagers for work, and train and pay higher wages to them above the national minimum wage compared to non-FSC actors. | |
| is.evidenceType | Synthesis paper | |
| is.focus.sectors | Agriculture | |
| is.focus.sectors | Forestry | |
| 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-international404 | |
| is.identifier.schemeName | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.identifier.schemeType | Voluntary Sustainability Standards |