FSC reflected in scientific and professional literature

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Forest Stewardship Council Hirschberger’s study (2005) 124 of the only two certification reports existing from Estonia states in the summary: “Ecologically valuable wet forest site types and ecosystems in natural water bodies will be conserved and restored, as the FSC certification bans the construction of new drainage systems and limits the reconstruction of new ones. This is an important improvement, as wetlands cover about fifths of the country and an extensive network has been established in the forest during the Soviet time.” Biodiversity in Sweden Hirschberger (2005) 125 analyzed audit reports of 22 FSC certified forest management units (covering a more than 10 Million ha) with 473 Corrective Action Requests raised since 1997. He found that “in Sweden, which started from a relatively high level of forest management, FSC certification has led to improved planning and use of forest residues for biomass in order not to compromise biodiversity management, (and on social issues the rights of the Sami people are now formally respected and addressed in forest management)”. Illegal logging and certification of conservation in Germany The certification of the forests of the National Park units Boddenlandschaft and Jasmund in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany had been suspended in 2007 because the certification bodies had revealed illegal timber harvesting and bad wildlife management. The certificate was re-issued in July 2008 after the implementation of the corrective actions: prosecution of the illegal logging companies and, establishment of a working group on wildlife management, studies on wildlife and on their impact on forests, and implementation of the study results into the planning of hunting strategies. The responsible Minister for Agriculture, Environment and Consumer Protection Dr. Till Backhaus summarized on July 2nd, 2008 that after the successful implementation of the corrective actions suggested within the FSC certification process, 124 Hirschberger, Peter (2005): The Effects of FSC-certification in Estonia: an analysis of CARs. WWF Forest Programme. 18 p. http://www.panda.org/downloads/forests/finalanalysisestonia.pdf (as of June 2008) 125 Hirschberger, Peter (2005): The Effects of FSC-certification in Sweden: an analysis of CARs. WWF Forest Programme. 25 p. http://www.panda.org/downloads/forests/fscanalysissweden.pdf (as of June 2008) 66 of 245 ® FSC, A.C. All rights reserved. FSC-SECR-0002
2. Impact in and beyond the forest: 2.3 Environmental effects the certification confirms that the country is on the way towards transforming the forests in the national parks into self-regulating natural forests. 126 Conservation in Bolivia Markopoulos (2002) 127 describes the Lomerío Community Forest Management Project in Santa Cruz, Bolivia comprising 25 Chiquitano indigenous people’s communities with an estimated population of 5,300. He summarizes as one of the impacts of the certification (more in chapters 1b and 1c): “(…) as part of a more general emphasis on conservation management, certification has obliged the project to prepare a protected forest area plan and take steps to reduce human disturbances such as setting and hunting.” Pennsylvania/USA: Wildlife, regeneration & higher timber prices To get empirical data on (economical) benefits through FSC certification, Bensel, Newsom and Bahn (2008) 128 examined six years of timber sale data provided by the FSC-certified US American Pennsylvania Bureau of Forestry (BoF). Pennsylvania’s state forest system comprises over 2.1 million acres and accounts for 12 % of the forested area in the state. The state forest system was established in 1898 to generate a steady supply of wood products, protect critical watersheds, and provide opportunities for outdoor recreation. They found that: “The Pennsylvania BoF was motivated to pursue FSC certification for a number of reasons (Pinchot Institute, 1998 129 ). First, the BoF felt strongly that their forest management prac- 126 MVregio Landesdienst mv/sn (04.07.2008): FSC setzt Zertifikat für Nationalparkwälder M-V's wieder ein. http://www.mvregio.de/show/143998.html & http://www.umweltruf.de/news/111/news0.php3?nummer=14365 127 Markopoulos, Matthew D. (2002): Role of Certification in Community Based Enterprises. In: In Meidinger, E., Elliott, C. and Oesten, G.(eds). Social and political dimensions of forest certification, http://www.forstbuch.de. 128 Newsom, Deanna; Bensel, Terrence & Bahn, Volker (2008): Are There Economic Benefits from Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Certification? An Analysis of Pennsylvania State Forest Timber Sales. WORKING PAPER. (as of 8 April 2008). http://www.dovetailinc.org/documents/working_paper.pdf 129 Pinchot Institute for Conservation (1998): Certification of Pennsylvania State Forest Lands: Exploring Issues and Opportunities. Sum. Rev. Nov. 21, 1997 Workshop, Rachel Carson State Office Building: Harrisburg, PA. 67 of 245 ® FSC, A.C. All rights reserved. FSC-SECR-0002
Page 1 and 2:
Forest FSC’s Stewardship vision a
Page 3 and 4:
FSC’s vision and mission FSC’S
Page 5 and 6:
FSC’s vision and mission 2.3 Envi
Page 7 and 8:
1. Introducing FSC: 1.1 Why FSC 1.
Page 9 and 10:
1. Introducing FSC: 1.2 FSC in figu
Page 11 and 12:
1. Introducing FSC: 1.3 FSC’s sco
Page 13 and 14:
1. Introducing FSC: 1.3 FSC’s sco
Page 15 and 16: 1. Introducing FSC: 1.3 FSC’s sco
Page 21 and 22: 1. Introducing FSC: 1.4 Measuring F
Page 29 and 30: 2. Impact in and beyond the forest:
Page 65: 2. Impact in and beyond the forest:
Page 117 and 118:
2. Impact in and beyond the forest:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
3. Impact on forest policy: 3.1 FSC
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
3. Impact on forest policy: 3.2 Inf
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
3. Impact on forest policy: 3.3 Gov
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
3. Impact on forest policy: 3.4 Dev
Page 187 and 188:
3. Impact on forest policy: 3.5 Cor
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
4. Beyond FSC: 4.1 Certification of
Page 197 and 198:
4. Beyond FSC: 4.1 Certification of
Page 199 and 200:
4. Beyond FSC: 4.2 Combating the il
Page 201 and 202:
4. Beyond FSC: 4.2 Combating the il
Page 203 and 204:
4. Beyond FSC: 4.3 Comparing certif
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
5. Conclusion FSC arguing that with
Page 219 and 220:
5. Conclusion (Poschen 2003). In ge
Page 221 and 222:
References REFERENCES Arboleda, Mar
Page 223 and 224:
References Errol Meidinger, and Dea
Page 225 and 226:
References FSC (2000): FSC Principl
Page 227 and 228:
References Corrêa Alves, Rodrigo F
Page 229 and 230:
References the Convention on Biolog
Page 231 and 232:
References PricewaterhouseCoopers (
Page 233 and 234:
References Ros-Tonen, Mirjam A.F. (
Page 235 and 236:
References Turtica, Marius (2006):
Page 237 and 238:
References Yuan, Yuan & Eastin, Iva
Page 239 and 240:
Annex I: 5 Develop an ongoing dialo
Page 241 and 242:
Annex II:Annex I: opment Facility 4
Page 243 and 244:
Abbreviations and definitionsAnnex
show all

FSC reflected in scientific and professional literature

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?