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 | 2022-01-23T18:55:20Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-01-23T18:55:20Z | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://open.fsc.org/handle/resource/554 | |
dc.title | Does Forest Certification in Developing Countries Have Environmental Benefits? Insights from Mexican Corrective Action Requests. | en |
dcterms.accessRights | Public | |
dcterms.accessRights | Open access | |
dcterms.bibliographicCitation | Blackman, A. et al. 2014. Does Forest Certification in Developing Countries Have Environmental Benefits? Insights from Mexican Corrective Action Requests. Resources for The Future. | en |
dcterms.issued | 2014 | |
dcterms.language | en | |
dcterms.publisher | Resources for the Future | |
dcterms.type | Discussion Paper | |
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.findings | From CARs analysis, two main results can be observed. Firstly, foresters seem to comply with CARs quickly and to receive less and less over time. Secondly and contrary to what could be expected, 'most CARs addressed minor procedural issues and focused on social, economic and legal issues rather than on-the-ground environmental changes'. | |
is.evaluation.scope | This paper is the reviewed version of a discussion paper published in 2014. It does not contain new data or material 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/10.2139/ssrn.2432179 | |
is.identifier.fscdoi | http://dx.doi.org/10.34800/fsc-international424 | |
is.identifier.schemeName | Forest Stewardship Council | |
is.identifier.schemeType | Voluntary Sustainability Standards | |
is.item.reviewStatus | Peer reviewed |