Publication: FSC reflected in scientific and professional literature: Literature study on the outcomes and impacts of FSC certification
FSC reflected in scientific and professional literature: Literature study on the outcomes and impacts of FSC certification
| dc.contributor.author | Karmann, M. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-01-23T18:57:34Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-01-23T18:57:34Z | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://open.fsc.org/handle/resource/950 | |
| dc.title | FSC reflected in scientific and professional literature: Literature study on the outcomes and impacts of FSC certification | en |
| dcterms.accessRights | Public | |
| dcterms.accessRights | Open access | |
| dcterms.bibliographicCitation | Karmann, M. and Smith, A., 2009. FSC reflected in scientific and professional literature. Literature study on the outcomes and impacts of FSC certification.. FSC Policy Series No, p.P001. | en |
| dcterms.issued | 2009 | |
| dcterms.language | en | |
| dcterms.license | Copyrighted; all rights reserved | en |
| dcterms.publisher | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| dcterms.type | Report | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| fsc.evidenceCategory | FSC impact-related | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Economic | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Environmental | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Social | |
| fsc.focus.tenureManagement | Smallholder | |
| fsc.focus.tenureOwnership | Community | |
| fsc.issue.environmental | Biodiversity | |
| fsc.subject | HCVF | |
| fsc.subject | Audits and assurance | |
| fsc.subject | Agriculture | |
| fsc.subject | Ecosystem | |
| fsc.subject | Supply chain benefits | |
| fsc.subject | Tropics | |
| fsc.subject | Forests | |
| fsc.subject | Certification | |
| fsc.topic.economic | Price premium | |
| fsc.topic.political | National Forest Policy | |
| fsc.topic.social | Gender | |
| is.availability.fullText | Full text available | |
| is.contributor.funderType | Private funds (NGOs, companies, VSS self-funded etc) | |
| is.contributor.member | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.evaluation.collection | Company/certified entities /co-op data records | |
| is.evaluation.collection | Interviews/surveys with certified entities and their representatives and workers/producers | |
| is.evaluation.counterfacts | No | |
| is.evaluation.dataSource | Data by scheme / tool under evaluation | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "The review of the literature provides strong evidence thatFSC is today recognized as a policy tool to address many forestry issues (Cashore 2006;Conroy 2007; Meidinger et al.2005; Rametsteiner 2005; Carey & Guttenstein 2008 etc.). FSChas established itself as one of the most influential market dynamics in the forestry and woodindustry sector, with its overarching goal of promoting responsible forest management. As areaction on FSC's success other forest and other voluntary certification schemes have followed(Gulbrandson 2008)." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "Although the majority of interest groups involved are aware of the positive impact of forestcertification, it is still the subject of lively controversy and debate, focused on plantation forestrycertification and beyond." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "FSC's progressand impact is by far lower in countries with poorly defined land tenure rights and a highdegree of centralization in forest authority and decision-making, and attempts to promote certificationoutside a national FSC standard-setting process (examples from Malaysia, Indonesia),have been problematic. However, even from those countries success stories related toimproved forest management in certified forest operations can be reported." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "Some of the screened research papers are focusing on FSC's impact on forestmanagement, leading to changes in the management. Their evaluations are based on an indirectassessment against the certification reports (e.g. Thornber 2003; Gullison 2003, Hirschberger2005, Newsom et al 2005). The authors reveal that certification has improved theconservation status and enhanced biodiversity levels in forests. They found that forest certificationis indeed a catalyst for often substantial changes to diverse aspects of forest managementapproaches, rather than a means of rewarding operations that were already conductingexcellent forestry before certification. While certification does attract industry leaders, eventhese operations are required to make important changes to aspects of their operations as aresult of the certification process. The extensive preparation that many operations undergobefore their assessment means that the impacts represented in research papers are likely anunderestimate of the true impacts of forest certification." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "The majority of improvements in certified forest management units have been described forforest planning based on inventories; improved monitoring and evaluation; reduced impactlogging and improved silvicultural techniques; adoption of scientific methods, for example inestablishing permanent sample plots; and biodiversity conservation measures (Newsom et al.2005; Bass et al. 2001). These and the wider policy benefits of FSC certification are oftenclearly described, while livelihood and economic benefits appear to be less often identified." | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | "There have also been important social benefits to local communities and forest workers, forexample, in favoring employment of local people and in the area of health and safety standards,since FSC forest management standards are generally above those demanded by nationallegislation and regulations, and their implementation is monitored by certification bodies (Poschen 2003). In general, the impact of FSC certification on workers are both direct andindirect (often reported e.g. from Russia, Brazil, e.g. by Viana 2003, Azevedo et al. 2003) andas effecting new policy in relationship to workers, increasing the involvement of workers indecisions, improving health and safety, and addressing issues over migrant labor (Thornber2003, Bowling 2003, etc.)." | |
| is.evidenceSubType | Synthesis paper - literature review | |
| is.evidenceType | Synthesis paper | |
| is.focus.products | Forestry products | |
| is.focus.sdg | SDG 17 - Partnerships for the Goals | |
| is.focus.sectors | Agriculture | |
| is.focus.sectors | Forestry | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Economic | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Environmental | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Social | |
| is.focus.sustainIssue | Forests and other ecosystems | |
| is.focus.sustainLens | Audits and assurance | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Sustainable sourcing | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Governance mechanisms | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Deforestation and forest protection | |
| is.focus.sustainOutcome | Community development and infrastructure | |
| 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-international655 | |
| is.identifier.schemeName | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.identifier.schemeType | Voluntary Sustainability Standards | |
| is.link.url | https://ca.fsc.org/preview.literature-study-on-the-outcomes-and-impacts-of-fsc-certification.a-1884.pdf |