We would like to thank you very much for giving us
the opportunity to present on PEFC certification during the EAC
Sub-Committee hearing on 1 November 2005 in London.
We also very much appreciate the EAC's invitation
to provide additional background information on the procedures
and requirements of the PEFC certification system and hereby present
the following information:
EAC minutes: The answers to question Q167 and Q177
of the hearing give the impression that PEFC is not consistently
applied across countries.
PEFC's reply: PEFC Council has put in place an open,
transparent and independent endorsement process for national forest
certification systems, which is unmatched by any other forest
certification system globally. It ensures that an equally high
and stringent quality and performance level is applied to all
PEFC endorsed certification systems globally.
Before PEFC endorsement, independent external consultants
check all national forest certification systems against 244 rigorous
requirements. The details of this process are laid down in Annex
7 Endorsement and Mutual Recognition of National Schemes and
their Revision of the PEFC Council Documentation (Attachment
1) and in the PEFC Guideline GL 2/2005 PEFC Council Minimum
Requirements Checklist (Attachment 2), which together with
all PEFC documentation are publicly available at the PEFC Council
website www.pefc.org.
PEFC is the only international certification system
that requires certification to take place, only after a national,
open and transparent standard setting process has been undertaken
in the country, in which all interested stakeholder groups have
had the opportunity to participate. The existence of such multi-stakeholder
participation is verified by the external consultants as part
of the several months-long PEFC endorsement process.
The full reports, on which the PEFC Council bases
its decision on whether or not to endorse a national forest certification
system, are published at the PEFC website together with all the
applicant system's requirements.
Interim standards certification as applied by other
international schemes—where locally limited standards are
developed by the certifier for this event on an ad-hoc basis and
consultations are done during a relatively short time span with
selected local stakeholders—are not permitted or recognised
by PEFC.
EAC minutes: The answer to question Q180 claims
that PEFC lacks the recognition of indigenous peoples' rights.
PEFC's reply: PEFC has a wide range of requirements
making social issues and indigenous peoples' rights mandatory
for PEFC endorsed certification systems. A background summary
of indigenous peoples' issues is given in the PEFC position paper
"Tribal and Indigenous people, local people, local communities,
forest dependant communities and the PEFC Council" (see
Attachment 3).
b. Property rights and land tenure arrangements
should be clearly defined, documented and established for the
relevant forest area. Likewise, legal, customary and traditional
rights related to the forest land should be clarified, recognised
and respected.
d. Sites with recognised specific historical,
cultural or spiritual significance should be protected or managed
in a way that takes due regard of the significance of the site.
a. Forest management practices should make the
best use of local forest related experience and knowledge, such
as of local communities, forest owners, NGOs and local people.
c. Forest management operations should take into
account all socio-economic functions, especially the recreational
function and aesthetic values of forests by maintaining for example
varied forest structures, and by encouraging attractive trees,
groves and other features such as colours, flowers and fruits.
This should be done, however, in a way and to an extent that does
not lead to serious negative effects on forest resources, and
forest land.
Criterion 4.1 The rights and responsibilities of
workers in the Forest Management Unit and local populations are
clearly defined, acknowledged and respected.
— The legal and customary rights of
local populations in respect to the ownership, use and tenure
of the forest land and resources are clearly defined, acknowledged
and respected.
— The modalities of access to natural resources
are clearly defined and respected by all
— Information is provided on and all stakeholders
are fully informed of their rights and duties.
— Damages caused are compensated according
to the norms in force or after negotiation.
Criterion 4.2 The concessionaire encourages the participation
of local populations present in the Forest Management Unit in
the management of forest resources.
— The concessionaire sets up ad hoc bodies
for consultation and negotiation with local populations.
— The procedure for dialogue and the resolution
of conflicts is functional both between stakeholders and within
each stakeholder body.
— All stakeholders participate in the control
of natural resources management on the basis of a protocol accepted
by all.
— Procedures for consultation with populations
during the establishment and demarcation of forest concession
boundaries are respected.
— Mechanisms for applying sanctions in
the case of rule violations are in place and agreed by stakeholders.
Criterion 4.3 All stakeholders consider the share
of benefits derived from forests to be satisfactory.
— The forest concessionaire ensures that
the populations living within or near the FMU receive a portion
of the revenue generated by the exploitation of the FMU.
— Local communities living in or near the
harvested forest area benefit preferentially from opportunities
in employment, training and other services.
— In accordance with the importance and
impact of the forest operations at the local level, the concessionaire
contributes to the development of the local economy.
Criterion 4.4 According to the importance and impact
of the forestry operations, the concessionaire contributes to
improving the health and education of local populations.
— The concessionaire takes preventive measures
to minimize any professional hazards in relation to forestry activities.
— Health-related aspects of living conditions
are improved for employees and their families.
— The health conditions of local populations
are improved as a result of the forestry activities.
— The concessionaire contributes to the
basic education of local populations and workers present in the
Forest Management Unit, in accordance with the contractual provisions
established consistent with national norms.
Furthermore PEFC also requires national forest certification
systems to comply with the following core Conventions of the International
Labour Organization (ILO):
No 29: Forced Labour, 1930
No 87: Freedom of Associations and Protection
of the Right to Organise
No 98: Right to Organise and Collective
Bargaining, 1949
No 100: Equal Remuneration. 1951
No 105: Abolition of Forced Labour, 1957
No 111: Discrimination (Employment and Occupation),
1958
No 138: Minimum Age for Admission to Employment,
1973
Minimum standards for credible forest certification
systems
EAC minutes: Question Q168 asked about minimum standards
of forest certification systems and in the reply the impression
was given that PEFC required less than the alternative global
forest certification scheme.
PEFC's reply: A comparative study on nearly 40 certification
systems around the world, undertaken by an independent consultancy,
has analysed and compared key requirements of forest certification
systems. The results were published in the CEPI Forest Certification
Matrix (www.forestrycertification.info), in which PEFC receives
highest ratings, especially for its adherence to ISO requirements
for certification and accreditation. A summary overview of the
findings of the CEPI Matrix is available at www.cepi.org
> Publications > Forest > Matrix: Finding your way through
Forest Certification Schemes (Attachment 6).
Independent comparative studies confirm the high
standard and positive impacts of PEFC certification on the ground
EAC minutes: The response to question Q172 implied
doubts on PEFC requirements and the performance of systems in
the field.
PEFC's reply: The high standard and positive impacts
of PEFC certification have been revealed through several independent
studies, like:
a. A recently published study "Effectiveness
and efficiency of FSC and PEFC forest certification on pilot areas
in Nordic countries", conducted by the consultancy Savcor
Indufor Oy, showing that PEFC certification has had a marked impact
on forestry in the Nordic countries (Attachment 7 or www.nordicforestry.org).
b. A parallel field testing of forest certification
standards in North America, Scandinavia and the UK found that
the PEFC endorsed systems assessed "achieved their objective
of promoting the economic, social and environmental management
of forests in a balanced way." (Attachment 8)
The report, titled "Parallel testing of forest
certification standards", is also available through www.upm-kymmene.com
> Media Relations > Press kits > Parallel field testing
of forest certification standards. It was carried out by the independent
consultant assessor Det Norske Veritas and WWF International acted
as an external observer and provided technical advice to the process.
Regional Certification
EAC minutes: Question Q 239 referred to the certification
approach of regional certification as also used by PEFC certification.
PEFC's reply: Regional certification is used in a
number of countries, eg Austria, Belgium, Finland, France and
Germany and has helped decisively to include European forests
in forest certification.
Over 60% of the total forest area in the European
Union is privately owned. There are about 15 million family forest
owners in Europe owning in average less than 13 hectares. In order
to avoid discriminating against small-scale forest owners and
to ensure their access to the market for certified products, forest
certification has to provide cost effective mechanisms and procedures
to facilitate their participation.
A forest certification process, as carried out for
the individual certification of large forest owners (ie the receipt
of application, assessment of documentation, appointment of audit
team, planning and preparation of audit, on-site inspection, preparation
and presentation of audit report and certification decision),
is neither economically feasible nor, appropriate where a forest
is owned by hundreds of thousands of small-scale forest owners.
Therefore, forest certification schemes (including
FSC) have developed a so called group certification approach,
which allows forest owners to be certified under an umbrella organisation
and both internal as well as external auditing is then carried
out based on sampling. (NB: regional certification is a form of
group certification limited by geographical boundaries).
The PEFC Council Technical Documentation not only
requires of any group (or regional) certification that an individual
forest owner must have signed a written commitment to follow and
comply with forest a management standard but also that the umbrella
organisation has procedures for managing the group (region), such
as mechanisms for the inclusion of new members, their registration
as well as a system of internal audits and the implementation
of follow-up corrective and preventive measures. All these internal
mechanisms enable the external certification body to base its
work on an appropriate sampling. The result of the sampling is
applicable to the whole group (region) and major non-conformities
can result in the withdrawal of the certification for the whole
group (region).
All national forest certification schemes endorsed
by the PEFC Council are based on the principles described above
and differences between them are only caused by the usage of mechanisms
specific to different countries (eg the work of forest owners
associations, regional planning, law enforcement, national forest
inventories, etc.).
The PEFC group (regional) certification approach
has been developed based on the principles of multi-site certification,
which is being applied for ISO 14001 or ISO 9001 certifications
and is governed by the IAF (International Accreditation Forum)
and Guidance to ISO (International Standard Organisation) Guides
(ISO Guide 62 and 66).
(B) Answers to questions asked in the email
of the Secretary to the Clerk of the Environmental Audit Committee
dated 10 November 2005
(For detailed answer to question Q239 please see
page 5 Regional Certification).
PEFC membership
The PEFC members are independent organisations,
legal entities which represent national forest certification schemes
in their countries. The PEFC Council requires that the PEFC National
Governing Bodies must have the support of major forest owners
organisations in the relevant country and that all interested
parties have to be invited to constitute such an organisation.
The decision on the acceptance of a new member is
made by the PEFC Council General Assembly based on written application
for membership and recommendation by the Board of Directors. PEFC
membership alone does not allow a forest certification scheme
to use the PEFC claims and/or PEFC Logo. Only member schemes which
have been assessed and endorsed as meeting all the PEFC Council
requirements can use the PEFC Logo and can "deliver"
PEFC certified raw material on the market.
Interest parties and interest categories
The PEFC Council requires that all the interested
parties have to be invited to participate in the standard setting
process and to create a Forum for the development of forest management
or chain of custody standards. The invited interested parties
should represent the different aspects of sustainable forest management
and include, eg forest owners, forest industry, environmental
and social non-governmental organisations, trade unions, retailers
and other relevant organisations at national or sub-national level.
The Forum itself shall define its consensus—building procedures
including balanced representation of interest categories.
MCPFE, PEOLG AND
ATO/ITTO PRINCIPLES CRITERIA
AND INDICATORS
The Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forest
in Europe (MCPFE) is an intergovernmental process which defines
sustainable forest management (SFM), six criteria of Sustainable
Forest Management (SFM), a set of indicators for SFM and Pan European
Operational Level Guidelines for SFM (PEOLG). The PEOLG are an
integral part of the MCPFE documents which define requirements
for SFM at the forest management unit level. The six MCPFE (also
called Helsinki) criteria are:
— Maintenance and appropriate enhancement
of forest resources and their contribution to global carbon cycles
— Maintenance of forest ecosystem health
and vitality
— Maintenance and encouragement of productive
functions of forests (wood and non-wood)
— Maintenance, conservation and appropriate
enhancement of biological diversity in forest ecosystems
— Maintenance and appropriate enhancement
of protective functions in forest management (notably soil and
water)
— Maintenance of other socio-economic functions
and conditions
PEOLG elaborates these six criteria into 20 requirements
for forest management planning and 25 requirements for forest
management practices (Attachment 4).
The African Timber Organization (ATO) is an organization
promoting sustainable forest management in Africa. ATO was established
in 1993 in co-operation with the Centre for International Forestry
Research (CIFOR) and the European Union (EU). It has 13 member
countries. ATO has developed Principles, Criteria and Indicators
(PCI) for the sustainable management of African natural tropical
forests in a several years-long process. In 2002 the revised set
of PCI were harmonized with the Criteria and Indicators of the
International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) and published
under the ITTO Policy Development Series No 14 in 2003. The ATO/ITTO
PCI provide a basis for monitoring forest management at national
level and also for the development of forest certification schemes
at forest management unit level. ATO/ITTO PCI define the sustainable
forest management of natural tropical forest in Africa using three
Principles, 15 Criteria, 57 Indicators and 140 sub-indicators
(Attachment 5).
EQUIVALENCE OF
PEOLG AND ATO/ITTO PRINCIPLES
CRITERIA AND
INDICATORS (PCI)
ATO/ITTO PCI and PEOLG were developed for ecologically,
socially and economically very different forests and forest management.
Therefore the elements for SFM are not identical due to differences
in forest ownership, the forest use for timber production and
other purposes as well as different general normative regulations
e.g. on social and health issues in African and European countries.
For example, recreational use and aesthetic values of forest,
which are important in Europe, are not specifically mentioned
in ATO/ITTO PCI. On the other hand customary rights, workers rights
and contributions to local populations are strongly emphasised
in the African standard. The basic differences of conditions for
forest management are indicated and taken into consideration in
the assessment.
The ATO/ITTO PCI and PEOLG do not include any major
elements that would be contradictory between the schemes. The
PEFC Council documentation (Annex 3 of the PEFC Technical Document)
requires that the gaps between ATO / ITTO PCI have to be complemented
in the national forest management standard. A detailed analysis
on the compatibility between PEOLG and ATO/ITTO PCI was made by
Savcor-Indufor Oy is and publicly available at the PEFC Council
website www.pefc.org (Attachment 9).
In chapter 4 of its Technical Document (Attachment
10) and in the Annex 3 Basis for National Schemes and their
Implementation (Attachment 11) the PEFC Council requires that:
— certification criteria for forest management
of all PEFC endorsed schemes (except schemes developed for countries
covered by ATO/ITTO PCI) shall be based on criteria and indicators
of the relevant intergovernmental process (eg MCPFE, Montreal
Process, ITTO) and shall comply with PEOLG,
— certification criteria for forest management
of PEFC endorsed schemes developed for a country covered by ATO/ITTO
PCI shall comply with ATO/ITTO PCI.
PEFC Council again would like to thank the Environmental
Audit Committee for the opportunity to provide this additional
information and trusts that it will further clarify the procedures
and requirements of the PEFC certification system. If you have
any queries on the above please do not hesitate to contact us.
November 2005
Attachments
1. PEFC Technical Document Annex 7 Endorsement
and Mutual Recognition of National Schemes and their Revision[39]
2. PEFC Guideline GL 2/2005 PEFC Council Minimum
Requirements Checklist[40]
3. PEFC Position Paper Tribal and Indigenous
people, local people, local communities, forest dependent communities
and the PEFC Council[41]
4. Pan European Operational Level Guidelines
PEOLG[42]
5. ATO/ITTO (African Timber Organization
/ International Tropical Timber Organization) principles and criteria[43]
6. CEPI Forest Certification Matrix[44]
7. Savcor Indufor study "Effectiveness
and efficiency of FSC and PEFC forest certification on pilot areas
in Nordic countries"[45]
8. Det Norske Veritas study "Parallel
testing of forest certification standards"[46]
9. Savcor Indufor study "Assessment
of compatibility of ATO / ITTO PCI with PEOLG"[47]
10. PEFC Council Technical Document[48]
11. Annex 3 "Basis for National
Schemes and their Implementation" of PEFC Council Technical
Document[49]
39 http://www.pefc.org/internet/resources/5-1177-455-file.1394.pdfhttp://www.pefc.org/internet/html/documentation/4-1311-400/4-1208-165/5-1177-455.htm Back
40
http://www.pefc.org/internet/resources/5-1177-456-file.1251.pdf Back
41
http://www.pefc.org/internet/resources/5-1177-1256-file.1424.pdf Back
42
http://www.pefc.org/internet/resources/5-1177-289-file.136.pdf Back
43
http://www.itto.or.jp/live/Live-Server/155/ps14e.pdf Back
44
http://www.cepi.org/files/Matrix%20leaflet%2004-133618A.pdf Back
45
http://www.skog.no/skog-data/Attachments/284/NSF-Report-final.pdf Back
46
http://w3.upm-kymmene.com/upm/internet/cms/upmcms.nsf/$all/f9da3f3eff672804c225700a001d30fd?OpenDocument&qm=menu,4,3,0&smtitle=Press%20Kits Back
47
http://www.pefc.org/internet/resources/5-1177-1079-file.1061.pdf Back
48
http://www.pefc.org/internet/resources/5-1177-287-file.1383.pdf Back
49
http://www.pefc.org/internet/resources/5-1177-451-file.1387.pdf
