Forest certification

Essay “I am more against of FC rather than in favor it” Introduction In the last decade world society started actively take care of intensively increasing forest harvest levels and its results. One of way to keep forest high proportion in world extent is forest certification. Forest certification is a system for identifying well-managed forestland. In this context, sustainability includes maintenance of ecological, economical and social components. And it’s good way to spread ecological knowledge to the society. But is it really good way to keep sustainability? I don’t think so, and I will try to prove it. The idea of forest certification showed up in 1990. It already had the name FSC, but officially it was born 1994 April 01 (so it was a joke  ). Advanatages of FC I found just three pluses of forest certification: 1. It’s great that forest certification is not obligatory because freedom of choice is always good. 2. FSC trademark can be a good marketing tool when selling timber or other products. 3. FSC creates new work places, a lot of good forestry specialists are working there. FSC has National Initiatives in more than 46 countries around the world (in Europe and Russia are 26 locations). So it is possible that we will have good jobs in Europe with our education. Disadvantages of FC Now a lot of people think that forest area are always decreasing. Forest certification gives society confidence that people manage forests sustainability. Yes, maybe it’s good way to say society “we are doing good, we are good guys”, but or really people will by more expensive tables, cupboards or beds, just because they have label? Consumers look to quality and price not to the some unknown labels. Forest certification should be implemented in countries where a lot of social problems an illegal logging occur (Russia, tropical forest), not in Baltic region where forestry situation is under control. All Baltic countries has their own forest laws witch try to keep sustainability, pay attention to traditions and are older than FSC or PEFC rules. Maybe we have to choose witch is better or forest certification or own country forest low? Way we need so much bureaucracy in our country? All forest owners have to pay a lot of money for certification every year. For what? Just to be checked if they keep the rules. Maybe it’s better to invest that money in forest, for example to do afforestation. I think that forest owner who doesn’t care about forest future and sustainability should pay. As I also understood PEFC is much more adopted than FSC to European conditions, for example “to give society confidence that people manage forests sustainably” I think it’s so important in our society. (All PEFC vision http://www.pefc.org/internet/html/about_pefc/4_1137_1346.htm). Another difference between PEFC and FSC is that FSC started to work in tropical forest and everywhere apply the same requirement. PEFC was establish in European private forest owner association adjusted rules for different countries in particular. Both of them duplicate most of forestry laws in many Baltic region countries. I favor all their objectives, but the only thing that I don’t like that they are very abstract and I have nowhere found strict requirements. For example how much dead wood should be in certified forest per hectare. From my previous studies I know that in Sweden it should be not less than 5 m³/ha, but forestry sanitary instructions requirement is not more than 3 m³/ha. So it’s very small space (2 m³) where forest manager can balance. Conclusion I understand forest certification as a marketing tool. Or a political and economical power game between different stakeholders like NGO, forest owners, forest industries, society. Maybe it’s better to use PEFC than FSC in Europe, because it’s made for Europe, adjusted rules for different countries in particular and it’s a little bit cheaper to forest owner. And in the end I just want to say Russell J. Horner (President and CEO, NorskeCanada, December 2003) words - “we believe that environmental leadership is good for business, because good business isn't just about economics. It's about doing the right thing in all facets of your business and that includes making products with high integrity. It's driven by a strong internal desire to contribute to forest conservation globally and to improve the paper producing value-chain “… References: • Klingberg, T. 2002. A European view of forest issues for consideration. Working paper No 18, University of Gävle, Sweden, 14 pp. • Meidinger E., Brukas V., Bouttoud G., Tysiachniouk M., Ahas R., Actiņŝ A., Hain H., Paschalis-Jakubowicz P., Kore M., Mardiste P. 2006. Eastern Europe and Russia, Regional Overview 163. In: Cashore B., Gale F., Meidinger E., Newsom, D. (Eds.) Confronting Sustainability: Forest Certification in Developing and Transitioning Countries. Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, pp 163-169. • Meidinger E.E, C. Elliot and G. Oesten. 2002. The fundamentals of forest certification. In: Meidinger E.E, C. Elliot and G. Oesten (eds.) Social and political dimensions of forest certification. pp. 3-25 WWW sources: • Forest Stewardship Council www.fsc.org • Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification www.pefc.org

Daugiau informacijos...

★ Klientai rekomenduoja

Šį rašto darbą rekomenduoja mūsų klientai. Ką tai reiškia?

Mūsų svetainėje pateikiama dešimtys tūkstančių skirtingų rašto darbų, kuriuos įkėlė daugybė moksleivių ir studentų su skirtingais gabumais. Būtent šis rašto darbas yra patikrintas specialistų ir rekomenduojamas kitų klientų, kurie po atsisiuntimo įvertino šį mokslo darbą teigiamai. Todėl galite būti tikri, kad šis pasirinkimas geriausias!