FSC reflected in scientific and professional literature

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Forest Stewardship Council revenue earned by the Pennsylvania state forests through sales to FSC-certified buyers is driven by the sale of black cherry. On average, FSC-certified buyers paid $198 more per thousand board feet (mbf) for black cherry from state forest timber sales than did noncertified buyers. The price differential for sugar maple was $138 per mbf, $49 per mbf for red oak, $35 per mbf for red maple, and $17 per mbf for white ash. There was no price differential for white oak. (There is a relatively high volume of high-value black cherry on the state forest lands). (…) These results indicate that, in addition to any environmental or social benefits that FSC certification has brought to the management of Pennsylvania’s state forests, certification has led to economic benefits in the form of higher prices being paid for state forest timber sales. (…) These findings represent an apparent contradiction to the conventional ‘producer pays’ wisdom, which holds that the brunt of the costs of certification are inevitably paid by the forest owner, with little monetary compensation.” 269 Purbawiyatna & Simula (2008) summarize in a comparative study of the different forest certification schemes for ITTO: “Verification of legality and SFM certification will increase the cost of timber production in exporting countries. These additional costs create pressure for price increases. However, in general, the buyers in importing countries have refused to pay a premium for certified product even though such premiums are being actually paid in some products and market segments where demand exceeds supply. (…) FSC-certified lumber has captured in some cases a 5% to 8% premium. (…) a premium of 11%-14% has been paid by some buyers for FSC-certified Brazilian products and an additional 9%-10% has been charged for CEmarking. (Oliver 2003). On the other hand, at the end-use industry level there continues to be limited willingness to pay for a premium (e.g. Werndle et al. 2005 270 ).” 271 269 Newsom; Bensel & Bahn (2008): ibid. 270 Werndle, L., Brown, N. & Packer, M. 2005. Barriers to Certified Timber and Paper Uptake in the Construction and Paper Industries in the United Kingdom. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environmental Management 12. Wiley Inter- Science DOI:10.1002/csr.093. www. interschence.wiley.com. In: Purbawiyatna, A. & Simula, M. (2008): Comparability and acceptance of forest certification systems. Main Report. ITTO 271 Oliver, R. 2005. Price Premium for Verified Legal and Sustainable Timber. A Study for the UK Timber Trade Federation (TTF) and Department for International Development (DFID). July 2005. In: Purbawiyatna, A. & Simula, M. (2008): Comparability and acceptance of forest certification systems. Main Report. ITTO 140 of 245 ® FSC, A.C. All rights reserved. FSC-SECR-0002
2. Impact in and beyond the forest: 2.5 Economic effects The Price Waterhouse Coopers analysis of “Sustainable Investments for Conservation” (2007) 272 on behalf of WWF Germany is based on three case studies, of which one is the FSC-certified operation Precious Woods in Brazil, the other two look at ecotourism. The analysis concludes that it is possible to combine nature conservation with private investment in a way that produces a satisfactory return on the capital invested. The report mentions economic advantages of forest certification if it is credible and transparent. “Opportunities in sustainable forestry mainly arise from the expected surplus demand for certified tropical timber. According to FAO estimates, the demand for industrial round wood will increase by about 25% from 1996 to 2010. According to information provided by UNECE and FAO, market price premiums of between 12% and 20% are obtained for FSC-certified sawn hard woods.” (…) “There is also an extensive portfolio of harvestable types of timber in the area of natural forest management. Companies can therefore react flexibly to market changes and switch to the production of goods with higher profit margins. The attainable market prices and the costs associated with harvesting and further processing are crucial factors affecting long-term profitability. Certification by the FSC has a favorable impact on the achievable market price. The harvesting costs are lower in the plantation project because of the higher density of trees and the existing infrastructure.” 273 The Price Waterhouse Coopers analysis of “Sustainable Investments for Conservation” also identifies risks associated with the acquisition of forests: “The risks associated with the acquisition of forests also include the possibility that it might not be possible to identify all land use rights before acquisition and that claims are asserted at a later date. The example of Precious Woods also shows that risks arise as a result of corruption and changes in administrative structures in the country, which could cause delays in the issue of official permits. [Ironically] FSC-certified companies that adhere strictly to the laws and regulations of the country are particularly badly affected by such delays.” 274 272 PricewaterhouseCoopers (2007): Sustainable Investments for conservation – The business case for biodiversity. A study on behalf of the WWF. Executive Summary. WWF Germany http://www.pwc.com/extweb/pwcpublications.nsf/docid/4FE9CE9D78BFBE21852572890054ECC0 (as of June 2008) 273 PricewaterhouseCoopers (2007): ibid. 274 PricewaterhouseCoopers (2007): ibid. 141 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:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
1. Introducing FSC: 1.4 Measuring F
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
2. Impact in and beyond the forest:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90: 2. Impact in and beyond the forest:
Page 139: 2. Impact in and beyond the forest:
Page 157 and 158: 3. Impact on forest policy: 3.1 FSC
Page 167 and 168: 3. Impact on forest policy: 3.2 Inf
Page 177 and 178: 3. Impact on forest policy: 3.3 Gov
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: 3. Impact on forest policy: 3.5 Cor
Page 191 and 192:
3. Impact on forest policy: 3.5 Cor
Page 193 and 194:
3. Impact on forest policy: 3.5 Cor
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?