Evaluating native and plantation forest certification schemes in Chile: beyond traditional governance

Abstract

The forestry sector globally faces many sustainability challenges. Forest certification arose two decades ago as a market-based mechanism to address these issues. Two forest certification schemes - the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and Program for Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) - are now well-established. However, there is a lack of comprehensive studies about the impacts of these schemes on forestry businesses. This empirical research investigated this issue for the case of Chile, which has a large export-oriented plantation sector and a smaller domestically-focused native forest sector. It used a framework modified from prior studies to assess the effectiveness of the FSC and the PEFC-endorsed CERTFOR schemes in both forest industry sectors, sampling 11 plantation forestry and 8 native forestry businesses. Seventy two in-depth interviews were conducted in 2013-4, with diverse industry actors and stakeholders from both small and large scale enterprises. Qualitative interview data were complemented by information from the literature and previous studies. The results show that certification has yielded more substantial environmental changes in large plantation forestry businesses than in small plantation and native forest operations. These changes included cessation of deforestation, rehabilitation of natural ecosystems, and reductions in the size of clear-cuts. Socially, while in most cases certification has brought tangible benefits to communities and encouraged a positive process of dialogue between companies and their stakeholders, certification alone has not solved some long-standing conflicts, such as Indigenous claims and workers’ rights. Economically, although certification has helped many companies to maintain/gain market access, some reported increased costs from modifying their operations to meet certification requirements. Companies did not report achieving price premiums for certified products. The FSC enjoys a better reputation than CERTFOR with many actors, including respondents from the plantation forest industry, which adopted CERTFOR in the outset. The FSC initially faced fierce resistance from the large plantation forest industry, which had been targeted by some ENGOs. Paralleling industry responses elsewhere, large industry established its own standard, CERTFOR, as an alternative to the FSC. During the last 5 years, however, due to international market pressure, this industry sector also adopted the FSC scheme. In these cases, the FSC is deepening the changes initiated by CERTFOR. Therefore, in terms of the general effectiveness criterion of my analytical framework, the FSC is now more effective than CERTFOR. Overall, certification in Chile is making more of a difference to plantation forestry businesses than to native forestry businesses. While both certification schemes have promoted legal compliance, the FSC is encouraging improvements beyond legal compliance. Notwithstanding these positive impacts, some weaknesses remain in the governance of both schemes. Certification has, generally, proved a more effective policy instrument to address forest sustainability issues in Chile than public policies. Public agencies, therefore, should promote certification to help them to meet their sustainability goals. However, to fully achieve it potential in realising sustainability goals, certification also needs appropriate public policies to provide a minimum legal framework that sets clear rules, particularly to address social conflicts, otherwise its effectiveness will be eroded over time.