Open Knowledge (FSC OK)

The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) forest certification system is a globally widespread market-driven mechanism that aims at responsible use and governance of forests, and its application is growing. However, the extent to which forest certification contributes effectively to maintaining forest biodiversity is an unresolved issue. We assessed the role of FSC certification for forest biodiversity conservation in Lithuania’s state forests. First, we analysed the indicators related to biodiversity conservation at different spatial scales in the FSC standard used in Lithuania. By applying morphological spatial pattern analysis and habitat suitability modelling, we explored the structural and functional connectivity of forest habitat patches of formally and voluntarily set-asides for biodiversity conservation. According to the Lithuanian FSC standard, active measures in forest management for biodiversity should be imposed at three spatial scales: ‘trees in a stand’, ‘stands in a landscape’, and ‘landscape in an ecoregion’. The total area set aside for biodiversity was 18.6 %, including 4.9 % voluntary set-asides. The quality of habitats in terms of forest stand age was low, only 9.4 % of all set-asides constituted older forests. The proportions of voluntary set-aside area varied among the different state forest enterprises, and the results indicated a clear trend to set aside non-forest or low productivity forest habitats. Small (<1 ha) habitat patches formed a major part of all set-asides, including formally protected areas. FSC certification alone was not able to maintain structural and functional connectivity of forests for species at multiple spatial scales in Lithuania. By keeping a minimum standard of 5 % forestland set aside for biodiversity, the state forest enterprises certified according to the FSC can only satisfy forest species with small habitat requirements. To maintain biodiversity, place-based learning among stakeholders for representative functional green infrastructures in concrete landscapes and regions, combined with transparent knowledge about the net effect of pressures and responses on the state of biodiversity, are necessary.