Перейти к основному содержанию

page search

Library Approaches to Measuring the Conservation Impact of Forest Management Certification

Approaches to Measuring the Conservation Impact of Forest Management Certification

Approaches to Measuring the Conservation Impact of Forest Management Certification

Resource information

Date of publication
января 2014
Resource Language
ISBN / Resource ID
oai:openknowledge.worldbank.org:10986/16498

Sustainable forest management (SFM)
certification emerged in the 1980s and 1990s as a mechanism
to promote responsible forest use and as an alternative to
boycotts of forest products amid growing concerns about
forest degradation and destruction. Since then, forest
certification has evolved into a multifaceted market-based
mechanism to promote compliance with sets of ecological,
social, and economic criteria to enhance sustainability.
Commodity certification has evolved from its origins as a
means of verifying organic and environmentally sustainable
production; issues like social equity, transparency,
participation, and legal compliance have become increasingly
relevant. One commonality in all certification schemes is
that they are voluntary, market-driven ('willing buyer,
willing seller') schemes aimed at transformational
change toward more sustainable production and consumption
patterns within existing market structures. This document
presents the state of the current knowledge on how to assess
impacts of forest management certification. It also
discusses the design, implementation, and use of forest
management certification. It focuses on methodologies to
provide evidence-based information on the environmental
impacts of certification. The concluding chapter briefly
discusses the economic and social impacts. The objective is
to identify areas where further methodological work is
needed to improve understanding on the impacts of
certification. Many benefits of certification, like improved
information on management practices by outside stakeholders
(for example, consumers, governments) are undisputed. At the
same time, there is less knowledge on whether or not
practices at field level have changed and how much. Although
improved information as such is a valuable outcome, more
quantitative information on environmental impacts will be welcome.

Share on RLBI navigator
NO

Authors and Publishers

Author(s), editor(s), contributor(s)

Romero, Claudia
Castrén, Tuukka

Publisher(s)
Data Provider