ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY (INCLUDES LITERATURE CITED AS WELL AS OTHER REFERENCES OF INTEREST). Reference Abusow K. 2011. Maine Executive Order Puts Forest Certification on Equal Footing. Good for Forests. http://www.goodforforests.com/
Aguilar F.X., Cai Z. 2010. Conjoint effects of environmental labelling, disclosure of forest of origin and price on consumer preferences for wood products in the US and UK. Ecological Economics 70: 308-316.
Aguilar F., Vlosky R. 2007. Consumer willingness to pay price premiums for environmentally certified wood products in the U.S. Forest Policy and Economics 9(8): 1100-1112. Archer H., Kozak R., Balsillie D. 2005. The impact of forest certification labelling and advertising: An exploratory assessment of consumer purchase intent in Canada. The Forest Chronicle 81(2): 229-244. Bowyer J., Bratkovich S., Howe J., Lindburg A., Fernholz K. 2009. Certification of Building Materials:
Summary Maine Executive order states “The design, construction, operation and maintenance of any new or expanded state building shall incorporate “Green Building” standards that give certification credits equally to forest products grown, manufactured and certified under the Sustainable Forestry Initiative Standards, Forest Stewardship Council, American Tree Farm System and Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification systems.” This could be an incentive for the US Green Building Council to adjust LEED rating tools that currently only recognize FSC. Three quarters of certified lands in North American (150 million ha) are certified to SFI, ATFS and CSA and are not recognized. Study looks at the affects of environmental labelling, disclosure of forest origin and price on consumer preferences for wood products. Products certified by a government agency or environmental NGO both had a favourable effect on consumer preference over non-certified option. A decline in preference was demonstrated along higher price premiums. Degree of sensitivity to price premiums was affected by demographic characteristics (age, income). Source of wood products (tropical, temperate, local0 was another key attribute that influenced purchasing decision). Study looks at willingness to pay by U.S. consumers for certified wood products from tropical forests. A price premium of 10% was identified for 3 of 4 products studied. Suggests that there may be niche markets for various products that can be exploited in the U.S. Telephone survey in 4 Canadian cities looked at purchase intent of wood and paper products by end-use consumers. The results indicated positive attitudes toward certification and willingness to alter purchase habits to favour certified products. Labelling has a greater influence than advertising, though advertising is still required to generate awareness. The report discusses the need for certification of wood for ‘green building’ projects, when other building materials remain less scrutinized (e.g. steel, aluminium, concrete,
Link http://www.goodforforests.com/
http://www.forestry.ubc.ca/sbml/pdfs/sfm,%20csr%20 and%20forest%20certification/the%20impact%20of% 20forest%20certfication%20labelling%20and%20adve rtising_.pdf www.dovetailinc.org
Reference Important or Not? Dovetail Partners Inc. 10 pages. Butterfield R., Hansen E., Fletcher R., and H. Nikinmaa. 2005. Forest Certification and Small Forest Enterprises: Key Trends and Impacts – Benefits and Barriers. Forest Trends.
Cashore B., Gale F., Meidinger E., Newsom D. (editors). 2006. Confronting Sustainability: Forest Certification in Developing and Transitioning Countries. Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies Publication Series Report Number 8. 626 pages.
Chen J., Tikaan A., Kozak R., Innes J.F., Duinker P., Larson B. 2011. The efficacy of forest certification: perceptions of Canadian forest products retailers. The Forestry Chronicle 87(5): 636-643. Clark M.R., Kozan J.S. 2011. Comparing sustainable forest management certification standards: a
Summary plastic, glass, bamboo etc). The report concludes that it is time to move toward certification of all materials used in construction, forest and CoC certification for wood could be used as a model moving forward. Benefits and concerns related to forest certification are discussed with respect to small forest enterprises (SFE) in NA and Europe (non-industrial private forest landowners, woodlot owners, family forestland owners). SFE’s have many barriers to operational success – insufficient market power, underdeveloped marketing expertise and knowledge. Three SFE Case Studies are profiled – O’Neill Pine Company, Groupement de l’Est-du-Lac-Temiscouata (GFELT), and Regional Group Certification in the Pirkanmaa Province, Finland discussing barriers and benefits to certification and lessons learned. Document consists of a series of case studies for developing countries/ regions where authors analyze: • Background factors influencing certification uptake (ownership and tenure, markets); • Support for certification (political/ stakeholder/ public) • Current status and effects of certification (social, economic, environmental). Conclusions suggest that limited uptake of certification in developing countries relates to the absence of a market for certified products; political instability; lack of local community capacity; forest tenure disputes and land ownership patters; and illegal logging and inadequately enforced forest laws. National survey (2008) of wood products retailers on perceptions of forest certification. Most retailers had no particular purchasing policies with respect to certification. However they reported up to a 20% price premium on certain certified products. Although the number of customers requesting products was small (<10%). Review of papers comparing certification systems (FSC, SFI, CSA). Qualitative analysis indicates that FSC performs better re: ecological and social issues, strengths of CSA-
Link
http://www.ibcperu.org/doc/isis/11580.pdf
http://environment.research.yale.edu/publicationseries/2538
http://pubs.cif-ifc.org/doi/pdf/10.5558/tfc2011-070
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art3/
Reference meta-analysis. Ecology and Society 16(1):3. Cubbage F., Richter D., Thompson M., Moore S., Judson E., Chestnutt M., Cox J., Boyette W. Undated. Forest Certification Costs and Benefits: The Experience of the Southern Centre for Sustainable Forests. 6 pages. Durst P.B., McKenzie P.J., Brown C.L., Appanah S. 2006. Challenges facing certification and eco-labelling of forest products in developing countries. International Forestry Review 8(2): 193200.
Fernholz K., Howe J., Bratkovich S., Bowyer J. 2010. Forest Certification: A Status Report. Dovetail Partners Inc. 14 pages. Fernholz K., Bowyer J., Stai S., Bratkovich S., Howe J. 2011. Differences between the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) Certification Standards for Forest Management. Dovetail Partners Inc. 14 pages. Fischer C., Aguilar F., Jawahar P., Sedjo R. 2005. Forest Certification: Toward Common Standards? Resources for the Future. 31 pages.
Summary SFM and SFI are in maintaining forest productivity to ensure economic longevity. Discussion based on perceptions in discussion papers, but not on measurable variables in forests/ field performance. Case study summarizes direct and indirect costs and qualitative benefits of achieving FSC and SFI certification.
Link
Review looks at challenges for certification in developing countries. Reasons discussed include: • Weak market demand; • The wide gap between existing management standards and certification requirements; • The weak implementation of existing national forestry legislation, policies and programs; • Insufficient capacity to implement SFM at the FMU and to develop standards and delivery mechanisms; • High direct and indirect costs of certification.
http://www.cfa-international.org/docs/Durst-et-al..pdf
Report reviews the current status of forest certification programs, summarizes changes over the last 6 years and speculates on future opportunities and challenges from a North America context. The focus is on FSC and SFI, but CSA/PEFC are also discussed. Report summarizes some of the differences between the forest management certification standards of the SFI and the FSC, focusing on standards that apply to forest management operations and audits conducted in the US.
www.dovetailinc.org
A discussion of the role of major corporations in creating demand for certified products, consumer demand and willingness to pay, the diversity of certification programs, and challenges to implementation in developing regions.
http://rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-DP-05-10.pdf
http://scsf.env.duke.edu/files/CertNCsafprocs.pdf
www.dovetailinc.org
Reference Forest Stewardship Council. 2010. FSC Business Value and Growth: Market Survey 2010. FSC Global Market Development. 22 pages.
Germain R.H., Penfield P.C. 2010. The potential certified wood supply chain bottleneck and its impact on Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design construction projects in New York State. Forest Products Journal 60(2).
Hansen E., Punches J. 1998. Development of Markets for Certified Forest Products; A Teaching Case Study of Collins Pine Company with Background Notes. College of Forestry Case Study Series. No 1. 25 pages. Heinz Centre and Pinchot Institute for Conservation. 2010. Forest Sustainability in the Development of Wood Bioenergy in the U.S. 52 pages. Hubbard S.S., Bowe S.A. 2005. Environmentally certified wood products: Perspectives and experiences of primary wood manufacturers in Wisconsin. Forest Products Journal 55(1): 33-40. Jayasinghe P., Allen S.D., Bull G.Q.,
Summary 2010 survey of 3500 companies in 29 countries. Economic reasons were cited as key reason for seeking CoC certification (78%) followed by environmental reasons (57%), and reputation reasons (23.5%). With regard to economic expectations, participants identified increased access to new clients, higher sales and greater client retention as the greatest incentives to pursue certification. Price premiums continue to vary considerably at the various levels in the supply chain. Study looks at the potential impact of a supply chain bottleneck at the sawmill level for LEED buildings in NY State. The program that dominates green building certification schemes accepts FSC only wood through suppliers with CoC certification. The study found that architects were knowledgeable of FSC wood and favourable to incorporating it in their designs. No issues in sourcing were found, however there was limited local supply (NYS) and many paid a premium which may relate to specialty products (tropical hardwood) or interplay of supply and demand with timing of construction. An older case study that outlines production capacity, marketing strategy, certified products marketing experience and lessons learned.
Link www.fsc.org/fileadmin/web_data/public/M_G_S/files/ survey_trademark_publication_spr_flip.pdf
Summary of workshops on woody biomass energy looking at biomass supply, sustainability standards (and potential link to certification), range of biomass energy supply options, federal/ state policy alignment. A survey of wood manufacturers, most were not CoC certified, and the majority were unfamiliar with it. Price premiums on certified products, increased market share and access, as well as operational and managerial improvements were not perceived by most respondents (n=239) as realized benefits of becoming CoC certified. Some firms reported that they had gained new knowledge and perceived enhanced credibility with the public by becoming certified. A National Survey in 2004 looking at value-added wood
http://www.pinchot.org/bioenergy
http://www.collinsco.com/Library/Archives/OSUColli nsCaseStudy.pdf
http://forestandwildlifeecology.wisc.edu/facstaff/bowe/ Hubbard_Bowe_Certification_FPS.pdf
http://www.forestry.ubc.ca/sbml/pdfs/SFM,%20CSR%
Reference Kozak R.A. 2007. The status of forest certification in the Canadian valueadded wood products manufacturing sector. The Forestry Chronicle 83(1): 113-125. Kraxner F., Mater C., Owari T. 2009. Green building drives construction market and forest certification: Certified forest products markets, 2007-2008. Chapter 10 in: UNECE/FAO Forest Products Annual Market Review. 20072008. Kollert W., Lagan P. 2005. Do Certified Tropical Logs Fetch a Market Premium? A Comparative Price Analysis from Sabah, Malaysia. XXII IUFRO World Congress 2005. Brisban. Session 163: Environmental goods, institutions and markets. 13 pages. Kozak R.A., Cohen D.H., Lerner J., Bull G.Q. 2004. Western Canadian consumer attitudes towards certified value-added wood products: an exploratory assessment. Forest Products Journal 54(9). Lihra T. 2011. Analysis of Ontario’s Wood Products Industry Export Capability. FP Innovations Project No 201004212 Final Report 2010-2011. 136 pages.
Summary products managers attitudes towards certification. The majority were not interested (64.8%); only 17.6% involved at time of survey, 17.6% interested in being involved in next 5 years. Low levels of knowledge and awareness and perceived lack of consumer demand were main contributing factors. Rate of increase in forest certification has been slowing since 2006, but COC grew by 50% in 2007, attaining 12600 certificates worldwide in 2008. Green building systems are helping to drive certification in the construction market in the US and Europe. Green purchasing policies and public procurement policies remain key drivers for certified forest products and forest certification. The most prominent market benefits are market access and brand image, price premiums are an exception in Europe and NA. A case study from Malaysia looking at prices of certified and uncertified logs from 3 FMUs. For most species groups a significantly higher price was found for certified logs (particularly hardwood species) which are in high demand for the export market. Mean values of certified logs were 5% to 77% higher depending on the species group.
Link 20and%20Forest%20Certification/The%20Status%20o f%20Forest%20Certification%20in%20the%20Canadi an%20VAWP%20Manu.pdf
Consumer focus group sessions conducted in western Canada to gauge market awareness and potential market acceptance of certification for commonly used value-added wood products. The most significant findings were that most participants had little knowledge of environmental labelling of wood products; all would be willing to purchase certified value-added wood products in the future; most were willing to pay a premium. Study explores export capabilities and readiness for Ontario’s wood products (primary and value-added) industry. Survey of wood products manufacturers (2391) outlines demographics of companies and export activities. Interviews with 103 wood products manufacturers give insight into interest in exporting, as well as export barriers and approach. Of this group >2/3 of exporters and ½ of non exporters were familiar with Chain of Custody certification. Familiarity with programs increased with company size.
http://www.forestry.ubc.ca/sbml/pdfs/Value%20Added %20Wood%20Products/Western%20Canadian%20Co nsumer%20Attitudes%20towards%20Certified%20VA WPs_.pdf
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/timber/docs/cer tification/2008-cert.pdf
http://www.gtz.de/de/dokumente/en-d80-Do-certifiedtropical-logs-fetch-a-market-premium.pdf
Reference Montague I.B. 2011. Understanding Chain-of-Custody Certification in the Appalachian Hardwood Region: Primary Manufactures’ Practices and Perceptions. Proceedings of the 17th Central Hardwood Forest Conference. GTR-NRS-P-78: 607-616.
Summary Study defines the characteristics of the primary hardwood manufacturers in the Appalachians, and documents their attitudes towards chain of custody certification. Study includes a questionnaire to 1239 primary hardwood manufacturers (majority were small, non-certified manufacturers). The complexity and expense of existing certification systems effectively excludes sustainable hardwood timber from green markets.
Link http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/gtr/gtr-p78papers/61montaguep78.pdf
Of 192 survey responses, 43 (22.8%) were certified, and 68 (46.6%) indicated they were interested in or actively seeking certification.
Moyes R. 2008. Sustainable Forest Management and USGBC-LEED. Prepared for the Canadian Home Builders’ Association. 23pages.
Study stresses the importance of educational marketing of the COC process to help increase certification adoption levels. Discussion paper to assess similarities and differences between the four certification regimes, and the reasons for and possible implications of USGBC’s preference for certification (LEED program). Similarities – all three systems in Canada ‘contribute significantly to sustainable forest management’ (CCFM) – all three require independent 3rd party audits; all require annual surveillance audits and public disclosure of findings through audit reports, and engagement with affected Aboriginal peoples to ensure their rights are respected; all offer chain of custody certification; all go beyond simple timber production by ensuring the conservation of biodiversity whether at the landscape level or in highconservation value areas, the maintenance of wildlife habitat, soils and water resources, and the sustainability of timber harvesting. Main differences: FSC found to be more prescriptive; keeping in mind that a standard can be prescriptive on certain issues which are not required (at least in Canada where legislation/ regulations already cover them). This makes the comparison of certification systems difficult.
http://www.chba.ca/uploads/enviroment/r%20sustaina ble_forest_management_and_leed-feb08.pdf
Reference
Summary
Link
Naturally Wood. 2011. A Guide to Chain of Custody. British Columbia Forest Facts. 8 pages.
An overview of CoC certification with information on management system choices, costs, and labelling. A brief overview of how to get started is provided as well. Info summary might be useful for EOMF CoC website content. Controversial question of whether certification – a market based instrument – actually requires operations to follow more sustainable practices. Study looks at conditions and pre-conditions of forest companies seeking FSCcertification in the US. Found that systems elements such as Management Plans, Monitoring and Inventory most frequently required change (by 94, 79 and 71% of certified operation respectively) followed by ecological elements such as High Conservation Value Forests and Woody Debris, Snags and Legacy Trees (by 71% and 63% of operations respectively). Regional differences existed based on state BMP’s – whether they were legislated or voluntary. Slide deck outlining status of certification and current and potential market drivers/
http://www.naturallywood.com/sites/default/files/Chai n-of-Custody.pdf
Survey of consumers found that level of information on labelling; supplementary advertising campaigns and marketing initiatives; and credibility of certifying organizations significantly influence purchase decision for certified wood products. Demographics including level of education, and exposure to wood resources through employment or leisure pursuits also affect decision-making. A study comparing the perceptions about environmentally certified wood products, consumer willingness to pay a premium for such products and entities that consumers trust to certify in 1995 and 2000. Results indicate that overall, consumer understanding has increased from 1995-2000, but self-reported purchases have declined and the perceived efficacy of certification in tropical forests is now questioned.
http://foglerlibrary.org/theses/pdf/ObrienKA2001.pdf
Newsom D., Bahn V., Cashore B. 2006. Does forest certification matter? An analysis of operation-level changes required during the SmartWood certification process in the United States. Forest Policy and Economics 9: 197-208.
Nussbaum R. undated. Certification and Certified Forest Products Markets. Powerpoint Presentation. www.proforest.net. O’Brien K.A. 2001. Factors affecting consumer valuation of environmentally labelled forest products. MSc Thesis. University of Maine. 133 pages.
Ozanne L.K., Vlosky R.P. 2003. Certification from the U.S. consumer perspective: a comparison for 1995 to 2000. Forest Products Journal 53(3).
http://www.fsc.ee/fileadmin/fsc_estonia/pdf/doesforest certmatter.pdf
www.proforest.net
Reference Perera P., Vlosky R.P., Dunn M.A., Hughes G. 2008. U.S. home-centre retailer attitudes, perceptions and behaviours regarding forest certification. Forest Products Journal 5 pages. Potts J., van der Meer J., Daitchman J. 2010. The State of Sustainability Initiatives Review 2010; Sustainability and Transparency. IISD, IIED, Aidenvironment, UNSTAND and ENTWINED. 161 pages. Rotherham T. 2011. Forest management and certification around the world – Progress and problems. The Forestry Chronicle 87(5): 603-611. Simula M., Ghazali B.H., Atyi R.E., Contreras O.P. 2010. The Pros and Cons of Procurement: Development and progress in timber-procurement policies as tools for promoting the sustainable management of tropical forests. International Tropical Timber Organization ITTO Technical Series #34. 108 pages. Simula, M. Astana S., Ishmael R., Santana E.J., Schmidt M.L. 2004. Report on Financial Cost-Benefit Analysis of Forest Certification and Implementation of Phased Approaches. ITTO. 148 pages. Spinazze M.C., Kant S. 1999. Market potential for certified forest (wood) products in Ontario, Canada. The Forestry Chronicle 75(1): 39-49. Sustainable Forestry Initiative. 2011. The SFI Program and Bioenergy from
Summary A survey of 500 home centre retailers in the U.S. for attitudes towards certified products. Top rated criteria in selecting wood products suppliers were price, quality, delivery and availability. Certification/eco-labelling was ranked last. FSC reported to be most accepted scheme.
Link http://www.unece.lsu.edu/ebusiness/documents/2008O ct/sc08_18.pdf
A review of voluntary sustainability standards with a chapter on forest certification looking at system characteristics and market trends.
http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2010/ssi_sustainability_review _2010.pdf
A critical review of forest management certification. FSC is criticized for the use of ‘interim standards’, operation outside of international standards organizations, and a potential conflict of interest with their accreditation system (ASI). FSC lobby damaging other certification systems and slowing opportunity. Study reviews developments and progress regarding timber procurement policies, assesses positive and negative impacts of these policies, analyzes the main similarities and differences between timber procurement policies, indicates the extent to which ITTO countries can meet the requirements and costs of these policies, and evaluates the need, desirability and practicality of coordination among policies to facilitate trade.
http://pubs.cif-ifc.org/doi/abs/10.5558/tfc2011-067
Five case studies in three countries look at costs and benefits to certification. Costs include direct (associated with certification) and indirect (compliance actions to meet the standard). Benefits include direct (financial = additional sales and price premiums on certified products) and indirect (economic, social and environmental). Study documenting consumer perceptions on environmental marketing, willingness to purchase certified products at a premium, variations in premiums across prices, and level of awareness and acceptance within the forest industry. A factsheet outlining the potential role for certification in addressing the potential environmental implications of the
www.itto.int/
http://www.pefc.org/images/stories/documents/externa l/en_PDF.pdf
http://pubs.cif-ifc.org/doi/abs/10.5558/tfc75039-1
http://www.sfiprogram.org/files/pdf/Bioenergy_Feb20 11_LowRes_VersionA.pdf
Reference Wood. www.sfiprogram.org
Sustainable Forestry Initiative. 2010. Leaders Call for Inclusive LEED Forest Certification Credit. News Release April 21, 2010.
Vidal N., Kozak R., Cohen D. 2005. Chain of custody certification: an assessment of the North American solid wood sector. Forest Policy and Economics 7: 345-355.
Summary growing demand for bioenergy feedstock. SFI requirements apply regulations regardless of the final product produced however the group recognizes that science and regulatory frameworks are still emerging and certification standards may require adjustment in the future. Canadian and Australian leaders are among those calling on the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) to ensure forest certification standards for the certified wood credit in the LEED rating tool recognize all credible third-party certification programs. The Canadian Green Building Council follows the USGBC on this issue, so this will impact LEED rating tools in Canada too.
Link
Study conducts a survey to determine status of COC certification in Canada and the US. Study indicates that company size is an important variable influencing adoption by primary wood producers with large companies more likely to be certified. This relates to perceived benefits and relative cost to the company.
http://www.forestry.ubc.ca/sbml/pdfs/Supply%20Chai n%20Management/Chain%20of%20Custody%20Certi fication%20%20An%20Assessment%20of%20the%20NA%20Sol. pdf
http://www.sfiprogram.org/files/pdf/statements_leed_c anada.pdf