Critical elements for forest certification schemes

Introduction

· Proliferation of schemes
· comparability and equivalence
· proposed critical elements
· some issues that were dropped

proliferation of schemes

· potential costs and benefits

Comparability and equivalence

· range of approaches possible

- unorganised adjustment
- unilateral, bilateral, multilateral and universal recognition

Proposed critical elements

· Reviewed ten comparability and equivalence related initiatives

· analysis of themes in three broad categories

- forest management
- certification systems and processes
- the marketplace

· proposes eight critical elements for establishing comparability and equivalence

Proposed critical elements

Themes Verdict

Accordance    
Access           
Conditionality 
Participation  
Accreditation  
Transparency
Independence
Consistency    
Continuous improvement
Cost-effectiveness
Chain of custody and product labelling

Accordance

· Certification should be consistent with internationally accepted principles of sustainable forest management, comply with any national and international policies, regulations and obligations which directly relate to sustainable forest management, and contain measurable performance standards (both quantitative and qualitative) that give effect to these requirements

- Recognises the complementary nature of forest certification, to national and international frameworks

Access

· Certification standards, principles and criteria must accommodate all forest types and ownership and operational structures

- Emphasises the imperative of non-discrimination

Participation

· In general, participation should be fostered. However, the level of participation should be appropriate to the particular stage of the certification process, with broad stakeholder involvement during establishment and dispute resolution stages, and narrower representation during accreditation and certification stages

- attempts to accommodate tensions between process and outcome oriented approaches to participation

- recognises political nature of standard setting processes

Accreditation

· The accreditation of certification bodies should be consistent with internationally accepted methods of assessment and selection, for example
ISO/IEC Guide 61:1996

- no reason why accreditation should not be consistent with well established processes

Transparency

· All stages of the certification process should be transparent. This includes the development of certification standards, criteria and principles, the operations of accreditation and certification bodies, and the non-commercial results of certification, in forms that are accessible and meaningful

- essential input to credibility

Independence

· A clear separation of processes (but not necessarily of institutions) shall exist between: establishing criteria and indicators; accreditation of certification bodies; and dispute settlement. Certification must be carried out by independent, third party bodies that are free from both commercial and policy conflicts of interest

- again central to credibility

- needs to be as comprehensive as possible and not enough to exclude only those with a commercial interest, but should be extended to those with a policy/advocacy interest

Consistency

· Both qualitative and quantitative standards and certification procedures, should be clear, and easily understood, assessed and recorded. Standards and procedures should provide reliable and consistent information, so that the certification process should lead to the same result from different auditors

- consistent application and interpretation is important

Continuous improvement

· To foster continuous improvement in sustainable forest management and certification processes, standards and procedures should be adaptive and regularly revised so that they may respond to new knowledge and changing demands

Chain of custody and product labelling

· Chain of custody procedures must be transparent, robust and verifiable by independent parties. The claims made by product labels should be clear and transparent. In the absence of mutual recognition and an agreed label, labels should clearly distinguish alternate certification schemes

- single label desirable

Some issues that were dropped

· Cost-effectiveness

- seems redundant where schemes will stand or fall in the marketplace

· Conditionality

- seems at odds with voluntary approaches to certification

Assessing existing initiatives and schemes

· preliminary assessment found general agreement

- looked at some comparability and equivalence schemes and some major certification schemes