Publication: An Analysis of Social Aspects of Forest Stewardship Council Forest Certification in Three Ontario Case Studies
An Analysis of Social Aspects of Forest Stewardship Council Forest Certification in Three Ontario Case Studies
| dc.contributor.author | Venne, M. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-01-23T18:55:46Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-01-23T18:55:46Z | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://open.fsc.org/handle/resource/648 | |
| dc.title | An Analysis of Social Aspects of Forest Stewardship Council Forest Certification in Three Ontario Case Studies | en |
| dcterms.abstract | Forest certification is a market-based tool whereby forest management is evaluated against a set of standards that consider environmental, economic and social elements of sustainability. Certification is therefore a means of providing customers with the assurance that forest products are originating from sustainably managed forests. It grew out of the ideal of sustainable forest management (SFM) and pulls from its predecessor the concept of multiple dimensions of sustainability. The focus of this project was the international forest certification scheme Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). A comparative case study approach was used to examine the social implications of certification in three FSC cases across Ontario. These cases include: Westwind Forest Stewardship Inc., Nipissing Forest Resource Management Inc., and Clergue Forest Management Inc. The purpose of this study is to examine how, and to what extent, social issues are being addressed. Three case studies are used to examine and compare how different forests deal with the social principles in the certification process. FSC addresses four main social issues which are the focus of research: consultation and public participation processes, recognition of Indigenous rights and culture, employee rights and community rights and well-being. Semi-structured interviews, a questionnaire and a document review were used to examine attitudes and opinions of social issues in certification, as well as the details and potential impacts surrounding specific social issues. This study concludes that FSC certification had only a limited impact on the four social issues in the three case studies. FSC did not make any fundamental changes; although it did improve representation, discussion of social issues, and relationships with stakeholder groups. The Nipissing and Westwind case study participants reported or attributed more changes to FSC certification than did those in the Algoma case study. The results of this study indicate that factors such as the strength of the Ontario forestry regulatory system and the economic downturn of forestry in Canada limited the amount of impact certification had on social issues in the three case studies. The awareness and strength of social principles in FSC policy need to be strengthened in order for certification to make a true impact on forest management in Ontario. | en |
| dcterms.accessRights | Public | |
| dcterms.accessRights | Open access | |
| dcterms.bibliographicCitation | Venne, M., 2007. An analysis of social aspects of Forest Stewardship Council forest certification in three Ontario case studies. | en |
| dcterms.issued | 2007 | |
| dcterms.language | en | |
| dcterms.license | Copyrighted; all rights reserved | en |
| dcterms.publisher | Wilfrid Laurier University | |
| dcterms.type | Thesis | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| fsc.evidenceCategory | FSC impact-related | |
| fsc.focus.forestZone | Temperate | |
| fsc.focus.sustainDimension | Social | |
| fsc.focus.tenureManagement | Indigenous People | |
| fsc.issue.social | Local communities | |
| fsc.issue.social | Indigenous peoples | |
| fsc.issue.social | Workers | |
| fsc.subject | Gender | |
| fsc.subject | Forests | |
| fsc.subject | Certification | |
| fsc.subject | Inclusive Forest Management | |
| fsc.subject | Civic Engagement | |
| fsc.subject | Theory of Change | |
| fsc.subject | Participation | |
| fsc.subject | Reporting | |
| fsc.subject | Women | |
| fsc.subject | Meta-analysis | |
| fsc.subject | Canada | |
| fsc.topic.political | National Forest Policy | |
| fsc.topic.social | Local communities | |
| fsc.topic.social | Indigenous peoples | |
| fsc.topic.social | Rights | |
| fsc.topic.social | Forest workers | |
| is.availability.fullText | Full text available | |
| is.contributor.funderType | Private funds (NGOs, companies, VSS self-funded etc) | |
| is.contributor.member | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.coverage.country | Canada | |
| is.coverage.countryAlpha2 | CA | |
| is.coverage.geographicLevel | Region | |
| is.coverage.latitude | 56.130366 | |
| is.coverage.longitude | -106.346771 | |
| is.coverage.place | Ontario | |
| is.coverage.region | North America | |
| is.evaluation.collection | Interviews/surveys with certified entities and their representatives and workers/producers | |
| is.evaluation.counterfacts | No | |
| is.evaluation.dataSource | Independent researcher data | |
| is.evaluation.notes | 3 case studies that may provide some information on social issues, but potential methodological issues that may undermine the impact conclusions: need to take care if quotes are used. | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | Nevertheless, some minor changes in the treatment of social issues can be attributed to certification and reoccurred in multiple case studies. These include: a better First Nation relationship or more First Nation participation,community recognition, increased documentation or formal agreements andmore dialogue about social issues in general. | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | The reason for the lack of change as stated by the interviewees: "I don't think [FSC principles and criteria] were developed for Ontario and with our social structure in mind". Perhaps this is true, considering that certification schemeswere originally created for forest management practices in developing countries. However, changes have been experienced by other case studies in developed countries. So perhaps the standard was not implemented to its fullest extent in this case study in particular. | |
| is.evaluation.quotes | Certification was originally developed as an incentive to increasemanagement standards in developing countries. Yet, most certified forests occurin developed countries, such as Canada, the United States and Europeancountries where forest management is already highly regulated. | |
| is.evidenceSubType | Descriptive information - contextual and operational | |
| is.evidenceType | Descriptive information | |
| is.focus.products | Other forestry and logging | |
| is.focus.sdg | SDG 15 - Life on Land | |
| is.focus.sectors | Forestry | |
| is.focus.sustainDimension | Social | |
| is.focus.sustainIssue | Rights of indigenous peoples and local communities | |
| is.focus.sustainLens | Indigenous peoples | |
| 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-international672 | |
| is.identifier.schemeName | Forest Stewardship Council | |
| is.identifier.schemeType | Voluntary Sustainability Standards | |
| is.link.url | https://scholars.wlu.ca/etd/877 |