16 | Opinion
A NEW ROUTE TO CERTIFICATION The goal of the US Sustainable Hardwood Coalition is a
certifi cation scheme that really works for small scale forest ownership, writes American Hardwood Export Council consultant George White
Thirty years ago I wrote an article for TTJ on forest certifi cation. It stated that there was demand for this ‘newfangled’ idea and big name organisations wanted to make it happen.
Since then I’ve been involved in various programmes to increase certifi ed forest area and develop approaches and policies to expand markets for legal and sustainable forest products. Part of me feels a sense of achievement, with millions of hectares now certifi ed and FSC and PEFC both widely specifi ed. But in the last decade I’ve also had a nagging doubt.
In this time, we’ve seen a decline in the rate of growth of certifi cation and trying to make forest certifi cation work everywhere and for everyone who wants it has been a losing battle. Where the big certifi cation schemes seem to have come unstuck is in their impact amongst private forest owners.
This bugs me because only around 10% of the world’s production forests have been certifi ed under any scheme and the vast majority of these are either state owned lands or large privately owned forests. That leaves a huge gap and it’s mostly fi lled by small owners who just don’t seem attracted to the idea.
In the US alone we’re talking of millions of private owners in hardwood supply. Does the uncertifi ed 90% of the world’s forests represent all the bad forest practices or are some of them getting along fi ne without certifi cation? There has to be a way to differentiate. There have been numerous attempts to make existing
certifi cation schemes attractive to smallholders. But is it time to try something different, to identify where there are issues and where there are good practices built on good governance?
Being indoctrinated in forest management unit
certifi cation, where a forest management plan is central to the process, the idea of risk assessments and approaches that assess a whole landscape or `jurisdiction’ initially made me tremor. But I’ve spent the last 18 months helping the American Hardwood Export Council- initiated Sustainable Hardwood Coalition (SHC) to develop a risk assessment standard focusing on non- industrial hardwood producers. Working with a ‘Standards Endorsement Body’ has helped keep things honest. Input from 10 individuals well versed in US hardwood forestry and trade has ensured the emerging standard is well focused and will guide risk assessments that are a fair refl ection of practices among smaller hardwood forest owners. Once the standard is live, the next challenge will be to see if mills can mitigate identifi ed risks.
The aim by 2025 is a new type of certifi cation, founded on risk assessments of US hardwood producing states, with risks mitigated at sawmill level along with a new chain of custody system. It will be compatible with and accepting of material certifi ed under other schemes and it will encompass large volumes, reducing costs to mills and buyers’ frustration in sourcing certifi ed hardwoods.
Over time SHC should grow into a self-supporting organisation backed by a coalition of supporters determined to deliver sustainable hardwoods to market and to be a part of a scheme that represents the best of what we’ve learnt about certifi cation, that draws together the best of good forest governance and all existing efforts to recognise legal and sustainable forestry. ■
TTJ | July/August 2023 |
www.ttjonline.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109
