Publication: Certification of community-based forest enterprises (CFEs): Limits of the Brazilian experiences
Certification of community-based forest enterprises (CFEs): Limits of the Brazilian experiences
| dc.contributor.author | Garcia Drigo, I. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Gabrielle Piketty, M. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Abramovay, R. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-01-23T18:55:35Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-01-23T18:55:35Z | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://open.fsc.org/handle/resource/611 | |
| dc.title | Certification of community-based forest enterprises (CFEs): Limits of the Brazilian experiences | en |
| dcterms.abstract | The Brazilian Amazon is one of the world's largest tropical forests. It supplies more than 80 % of Brazil's timber production and makes this nation the second largest producer of tropical wood. The forestry sector is of major importance in terms of economic production and employment creation. However, the Brazilian Amazon is also known for its high deforestation rate and for its rather unsustainably managed timber resources, a fact which puts in the balance the long-term future of the forestry sector in the region. Since the mid-1990s, with strong support from World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the number of tropical forests certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) has significantly increased. This is especially true for projects sponsored by large scale companies. The number of community-based forest management projects has also increased. Certification of community-based forest enterprises (CFEs) was initially a goal for the sponsors and community members. Certification is viewed as a way to reach alternative timber markets. In Brazil, the state of Acre has the highest concentration of CFEs certified by FSC. Most of them have been implemented with the support of environmental NGOs and public funds. Environmental NGOs strongly defend the advantages of certification for communities; however, in reality, this option is not that advantageous. Despite all the efforts, the number of participants in each project remains low. Why is this occurring? In this paper, we analyze the underlying motives of a few individual's participation in CFEs certification projects. We aim to present and discuss some factors that shape the success of CFEs and their later certification. The results are based on surveys conducted in two certified CFEs in the state of Acre. | en |
| dcterms.accessRights | Public | |
| dcterms.accessRights | Open access | |
| dcterms.bibliographicCitation | Drigo, P.I.G., Piketty, M.G. and Abramovay, R., 2009. Certification of community-based forest enterprises (CFEs): limits of the Brazilian experiences. Ethics and Economics, 6(2), pp.1-20. | en |
| dcterms.issued | 2009 | |
| dcterms.language | en | |
| dcterms.license | Copyrighted; all rights reserved | en |
| dcterms.type | Journal Article | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| fsc.evidenceCategory | FSC impact-related | |
| fsc.focus.forestType | Natural Forest | |
| fsc.focus.forestZone | Tropical | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Social | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Economic | |
| fsc.issue.environmental | Deforestation, tree cover loss | |
| fsc.subject | Small Forest Enterprises | |
| fsc.subject | Forests | |
| fsc.subject | Certification | |
| fsc.subject | Certification | |
| fsc.subject | Market Analysis | |
| fsc.subject | Global | |
| fsc.subject | Barriers to Certification | |
| fsc.subject | Benefits of Certification | |
| fsc.subject | Future Trends | |
| fsc.subject | Case Study | |
| is.availability.fullText | Full text available | |
| is.contributor.funderType | Unreported | |
| is.contributor.member | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.coverage.country | Brazil | |
| is.coverage.countryAlpha2 | BR | |
| is.coverage.geographicLevel | Region | |
| 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.dataSource | Independent researcher data | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | We found that the adoption of management plans required logging companies to reduce their annual allowable cut by 11% on average, while certified FMUs underwent an average reduction of about 18%. This is a clear positive impact of certificationallowing a better recovery of valuable species for the next rotation and mechanically reducing the damages to the residual stand by lowering the harvest intensity. | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | If the ‘FSC logic' was applied by all certifying bodies, on all the most harvested species, the average reduction in the annual allowable cut of all certified FMUs would be about 34% | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | Companies seek this outcome not only because they have to compete with companies that sell the same few species, but not certified, on the same markets, but also because they know that some certifying bodies allow weaker harvesting rules tobe adopted, and this is profitable for the companies. | |
| is.evidenceSubType | Descriptive information - contextual and operational | |
| is.evidenceType | Descriptive information | |
| is.extent.number | 2 | |
| is.extent.volume | 6 | |
| is.focus.products | Forestry products | |
| is.focus.sdg | SDG 15 - Life on Land | |
| is.focus.sectors | Agriculture | |
| is.focus.sectors | Forestry | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Social | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Economic | |
| is.focus.sustainIssue | Rights of indigenous peoples and local communities | |
| is.focus.sustainIssue | Participant costs and benefits | |
| is.focus.sustainLens | Audits and assurance | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Land rights | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Market access | |
| 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-international509 | |
| is.identifier.schemeName | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.identifier.schemeType | Voluntary Sustainability Standards | |
| is.journalName | Éthique et économique/Ethics and Economics | |
| is.link.url | https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/55646251.pdf |