Publication: The impacts of forest certification for Chilean forestry businesses
The impacts of forest certification for Chilean forestry businesses
| dc.contributor.author | Tricallotis, M. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Gunningham, N. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Kanowski, P. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-01-23T18:55:47Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-01-23T18:55:47Z | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://open.fsc.org/handle/resource/654 | |
| dc.language | en | |
| dc.rights | Paywalled content | |
| dc.title | The impacts of forest certification for Chilean forestry businesses | en |
| dcterms.abstract | Forest certification, under both the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the PEFC-endorsed Chilean CERTFOR schemes, has been widely adopted in both the native and plantation forestry sectors in Chile. This study of the impacts of forest certification on Chilean forestry businesses is based in-depth interviews with 72 actors representing a diversity of roles and perspectives in the Chilean forestry sector. The impacts of certification have been greatest in the plantation forestry sector, and for larger businesses. These impacts include the cessation of deforestation for plantation establishment, rehabilitation of natural ecosystems, greater benefits to local communities, and the development of a positive dialogue between forestry businesses and their stakeholders. However, certification has not resolved some long-standing conflicts between forestry businesses and other actors, notably in relation to Indigenous peoples' land claims and workers' rights. Both certification schemes in Chile have promoted legal compliance; FSC certification is encouraging improvements beyond legal compliance, and deepening the changes initiated by CERTFOR. The results illustrate how certification can contribute to effective hybrid governance regimes, but also of the limits of certification in addressing deeply-entrenched social conflicts. Nevertheless, the impacts of certification for Chilean forestry businesses and their stakeholders have largely been positive. | en |
| dcterms.issued | 2018 | |
| dcterms.type | Journal Article | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| fsc.evidenceCategory | FSC effect-related studies | |
| fsc.focus.forestType | Plantation | |
| fsc.focus.forestZone | Temperate | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | 1. Economic | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | 2. Environmental | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | 3. Social | |
| fsc.focus.tenureManagement | (not yet curated) | |
| fsc.focus.tenureOwnership | (not yet curated) | |
| fsc.issue.environmental | Representation | |
| fsc.issue.environmental | Occupational health | |
| fsc.issue.environmental | Employment conditions | |
| fsc.topic.environmental | 1.4. Market | |
| fsc.topic.environmental | 2.4. Compositional diversity | |
| fsc.topic.environmental | 2.2. Forest degradation | |
| fsc.topic.environmental | 3.1. Workers | |
| fscdoc.hashidden.admin | yes | |
| fscdoc.hashidden.user | yes | |
| is.coverage.country | Chile | |
| is.coverage.region | South America | |
| is.evaluation.collection | Interviews/surveys | |
| is.evaluation.collection | CAR analysis | |
| is.evidenceSubType | (not yet curated) | |
| is.evidenceType | (not yet curated) | |
| is.extent.pages | 82-91 | |
| is.extent.volume | 92 | |
| is.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.03.007 | |
| is.identifier.fscdoi | http://dx.doi.org/10.34800/fsc-international591 | |
| is.journalName | Forest Policy and Economics |