Publication:
Comparing Sustainabale Forest Management Certification Standards: A Meta-Analysis

dc.contributor.authorClark, M.R.
dc.contributor.authorKozar, J.S.
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-23T18:55:43Z
dc.date.available2022-01-23T18:55:43Z
dc.identifier.urihttps://open.fsc.org/handle/resource/641
dc.languageen
dc.rightsPublic
dc.rightsOpen access
dc.titleComparing Sustainabale Forest Management Certification Standards: A Meta-Analysisen
dcterms.abstractTo solve problems caused by conventional forest management, forest certification has emerged as a driver of sustainable forest management. Several sustainable forest management certification systems exist, including the Forest Stewardship Council and those endorsed by the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification, such as the Canadian Standards Association – Sustainable Forestry Management Standard CAN/CSA - Z809 and Sustainable Forestry Initiative. For consumers to use certified products to meet their own sustainability goals, they must have an understanding of the effectiveness of different certification systems. To understand the relative performance of three systems, we determined: (1) the criteria used to compare the Forest Stewardship Council, Canadian Standards Association – Sustainable Forestry Management, and Sustainable Forestry Initiative, (2) if consensus exists regarding their ability to achieve sustainability goals, and (3) what research gaps must be filled to improve our understanding of how forest certification systems affect sustainable forest management. We conducted a qualitative meta-analysis of 26 grey literature references (books, industry and nongovernmental organization publications) and 9 primary literature references (articles in peer-reviewed academic journals) that compared at least two of the aforementioned certification systems. The Forest Stewardship Council was the highest performer for ecological health and social sustainable forest management criteria. The Canadian Standards Association – Sustainable Forestry Management and Sustainable Forestry Initiative performed best under sustainable forest management criteria of forest productivity and economic longevity of a firm. Sixty-two percent of analyses were comparisons of the wording of certification system principles or criteria; 34% were surveys of foresters or consumers. An important caveat to these results is that only one comparison was based on empirically collected field data. We recommend that future studies collect ecological and socioeconomic data from forests so purchasers can select certified forest products based on empirical evidence.en
dcterms.accessRightsPublic
dcterms.accessRightsOpen access
dcterms.bibliographicCitationClark, M.R. and Kozar, J.S., 2011. Comparing sustainable forest management certifications standards: a meta-analysis. Ecology and Society, 16(1)en
dcterms.issued2011
dcterms.licenseOtheren
dcterms.otherClark, M.R. and Kozar, J.S., 2011. Comparing sustainable forest management certifications standards: a meta-analysis. Ecology and Society, 16(1)
dcterms.typeJournal Article
dspace.entity.typePublication
fsc.evidenceCategoryFSC effect-related studies
fsc.focus.forestType(not yet curated)
fsc.focus.forestZone(not yet curated)
fsc.focus.sustainDimensionEconomic
fsc.focus.sustainDimensionEnvironmental
fsc.focus.sustainDimensionSocial
fsc.focus.tenureManagement(not yet curated)
fsc.focus.tenureOwnership(not yet curated)
fsc.issue.environmental(not yet curated)
fsc.subjectForests
fsc.subjectCertification
fsc.topic.environmental(not yet curated)
is.availability.fullTextFull text available
is.contributor.funderTypePrivate funds (NGOs, companies, VSS self-funded etc)
is.contributor.memberForest Stewardship Council
is.coverage.countryCanada
is.coverage.countryAlpha2CA
is.coverage.geographicLevelCountry
is.coverage.latitude56.130366
is.coverage.longitude-106.346771
is.coverage.regionNorth America
is.evaluation.collectionCompany data
is.evaluation.counterfactsNo
is.evaluation.dataSourceData by scheme / tool under evaluation
is.evidenceSubTypeMeta-analysis
is.evidenceTypeSynthesis paper
is.extent.number1
is.extent.volume16
is.focus.productsOther forestry and logging
is.focus.sdgSDG 17 - Partnerships for the Goals
is.focus.sectorsForestry
is.focus.sustainDimensionEconomic
is.focus.sustainDimensionEnvironmental
is.focus.sustainDimensionSocial
is.focus.sustainIssueForests and other ecosystems
is.focus.sustainLensMultiple certification
is.focus.sustainOutcomeEcosystem quality
is.focus.systemElementMandE outcomes and impacts
is.focus.systemElementMandE performance monitoring
is.identifier.codeImpacts
is.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.5751/es-03736-160103
is.identifier.fscdoihttp://dx.doi.org/10.34800/fsc-international774
is.identifier.schemeNameForest Stewardship Council
is.identifier.schemeNameSustainable Forestry Initiative
is.identifier.schemeNameCanadian Standards Association
is.identifier.schemeTypeVoluntary Sustainability Standards
is.item.reviewStatusPeer reviewed
is.journalNameEcology and Society
Download