Archive for category: newsletter

Advice from the Netherlands Timber Procurement Assessment Committee (TPAC) that the STIP sustainable timber certification scheme meets Dutch government timber procurement rules has been accepted by the State Secretary for Infrastructure and Water Management. However, the scheme has met with criticism from the PEFC and FSC.

STIP was developed by Dutch timber research institute Stichting Hout Research (SHR) and launched in 2017. It guarantees that accredited suppliers sell exclusively timber from sustainable sources that meet the Dutch Procurement Criteria for Timber, such as PEFC or FSC-certified forests. At the launch of the scheme, SHR Director Oscar van Doorn said STIP aligned with the objectives of the Netherlands’ multi-sector-backed Green Deal and Wood Covenant to make sustainably certified timber the market norm and to remove logistical barriers to its use. “It’s a breakthrough,” he said. “Removing uncertainties about mixing woods with different chain of custody (CoC) certificates and facilitating achievement of the broad-based goal that 100% of timber is from responsibly managed forestry.”

From its assessment of STIP, TPAC judged that the scheme meets Dutch government purchasing policy requirements for chain of custody, Development, Application and Management of Certification Systems and also for product claims ‘in many respects in a similar way to FSC and PEFC’. It subsequently advised the Dutch State Secretary to accept STIP certification under procurement policy and she has now taken this advice.

However, the PEFC and FSC have both raised concerns that STIP may ultimately adversely impact forest management timber sustainability certification. PEFC Netherlands chair Maarten Willemen states that, while it may simplify business for companies by offering a mechanism for them to mix PEFC and FSC material, this benefit would be ‘very short-lived’.

“STIP can only exist because it takes the outcome of the core work of PEFC and FSC – sustainably managed forests from which certified timber is sourced – and provides it to companies under a different label,” said Mr Willemen. “STIP removes the ability of PEFC and FSC to spread the burden of financing forest certification among all actors along the timber value chain, eventually burdening forests owners with the entire costs. If STIP became mainstream, it would ultimately lead to the demise of PEFC and FSC and consequently STIP itself.”

FSC Netherlands said, like the PEFC, it endorsed the ambition of STIP, that all timber on the Dutch market should be from verified responsibly managed forest. Both also commended STIP certificate holders in their efforts to purchase and use only sustainable timber. However, the FSC also shared the view of the PEFC that it potentially undermined the capacity of certification schemes to spread their costs along the supply chain, and also said it did not fulfil the role of a certification scheme itself.

“The FSC and PEFC certification schemes invest a lot in forests to prevent deforestation, to protect ecological valuable areas, to improve working conditions, indigenous people’s rights and biodiversity. These investments are done, among others, with the fee contributed by chain of custody certified companies worldwide to these schemes. Since there is a clear relation between their standards for responsible forest management and chain of custody, they support the Dutch government’s ambitions to procure sustainable timber and to promote sustainable forest management,” commented FSC Netherlands Director Liesbeth Gort in the TPAC Stakeholder Forum on STIP. “Initiatives like STIP facilitate companies at the end of the chain of custody, but make no direct effort to provide standards for, or improve sustainable forest management. [Therefore] it should not be considered as a certification scheme as defined by the Dutch Government.”

A spokesperson for STIP said that it only commends what it categorises as ‘standarised timber’, that is material certified under FSC, PEFC or the Dutch Keurhout schemes. They acknowledged that FSC and PEFC raised objections to STIP’s acceptance under Dutch government procurement rules in the TPAC assessment consultation period. “But in the end, STIP proved to be in compliance,” said the spokesperson. “The question of whether it is FSC or PEFC-approved is not relevant.”

They added that government acceptance of STIP certification opened the way for accredited companies to access ‘green finance’, similarly to FSC, PEFC and Keurhout certification, and to use their status and that of their products under BREEAM.

In 2019, 33% of secondary tropical wood products imported by the EU and UK were certified sustainable, positively impacting 763,000-925,000 ha of tropical forest, according to a new report from IDH – the Sustainable Trade Initiative. If importers sourced 100% certified sustainable, it concludes, this figure would rise to over 2 million ha.

The just-released publication, ‘Understanding sustainable secondary tropical wood products through data’, covers the four main types of tropical secondary products imported by the EU and UK – doors, mouldings, windows and other joinery. It was commissioned by IDH for the STTC and undertaken by sustainable forest management institute Probos and the Global Timber Forum.

It builds on these partners’ 2019 report, which covered EU and UK primary tropical wood products imports, estimating that 28.5% were certified sustainable. Bringing the findings of the two publications together, the new report states that, if all these countries’ tropical timber imports were certified, 18 million ha of forest would be positively impacted. This, it says, could also cut global carbon emissions by 100 million tonnes per year.

Like the earlier report, it estimates volumes of FSC and PEFC-certified timber imports using the ‘exposure to certification method’. This takes the certified percentage of a supplier country’s total forest area and projects the share onto its exports to consumer countries.

The new report additionally takes account of EU and UK imports of FLEGT-licensed products (from Indonesia, the only country so far to start licensing under the EU FLEGT initiative), from other FLEGT Voluntary Partnership Agreement countries and products covered by other verified legality schemes.

Of the EU and UK’s 187,500 tonne import total of secondary tropical wood products in 2019, 90% were accounted for by France, the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium and the UK. The Netherlands was the biggest importer of such products exposed to certification, with a total of between 25,800 and 27,800 tonnes, followed by France, Belgium, Germany, the UK, Italy and Spain. Biggest overall suppliers were Indonesia and Brazil, together accounting for 77% of EU and UK imports, while Indonesia was the biggest provider of products exposed to certification, with 76% market share.

The report also draws on findings of an enquiry undertaken by the International Tropical Timber Technical Association (ATIBT) and Probos. With input from companies in Central and West Africa, it compiled data on forest yields, certification and its impacts, and trade flows. The information on yield was used by the IDH report authors to help calculate potential impact of EU and UK demand on sustainable forest management area.

The report concludes that ‘all actors must support raising the bar to 100% sourcing of verified sustainable tropical timber products and promote their applications’. The sector should also work together to further ‘improve availability, quality and transparency of information’ to inform strategies for achieving this objective. Given the goals they have in common to advance SFM, the report also urges exploration of synergies between the EU Timber Regulation, FLEGT licensing and certification.
“A growing European market for sustainable timber can foster sustainable forest practice across the world, and a more resilient and sustainable society and environment globally,” concludes IDH chief executive Daan Wensing. “We urge European governments, companies, and NGOs to act to reach 100% verified sustainable tropical timber imports.”

Read the report

FSC Africa Deputy Regional Director Steve Ball has responded to concerns of Congo Basin forest and timber companies that FSC rules stipulating protection of 50% of intact forest landscapes (IFLs) in certified concessions can threaten their commercial viability.  He has laid out how current rules can operate flexibly in the interests of environment and business and also highlights that other options will be discussed at the 2021 FSC General Assembly.

The FSC Congo Basin Regional Working Group (RWG) on High Conservation Values recommended that, to ensure the success of forest businesses, a 20% minimum threshold for protection of IFLs in concessions should operate in the area. A study commissioned by FSC from Form International into the economic, social and environmental impacts of its IFL rules in the region, which was accepted by FSC this year, subsequently provided support for the recommendation. Despite the study findings, Mr Ball said that the 20% threshold did not meet FSC IFL requirements as currently framed, which were laid down in its motion 2014/65.

However there were ‘two avenues under which a lower threshold [than 50%] could be incorporated into FSC national standards’. “The first is if the membership passes an amendment to M2014/65 at a future FSC General Assembly (GA) and the various motions proposed for discussion at the GA2021, on which FSC is committed to high quality, informed debate, suggest some possible alternate solutions,” he said.

Secondly, he added, M2014/65 does not specify that the requirement “to protect the vast majorities of IFLs” must be wholly achieved through FSC-certified concessions. “If it can be shown that those IFLs exist within a  well-managed landscape incorporating official government protected areas, in which the intactness of large areas of IFLs are effectively maintained, then it may be possible to set a lower minimum protection threshold within FSC-certified concessions in which IFLs extend into government protected areas,” said Mr Ball.  Currently, he pointed out, IFL mapping in Gabon is being refined to see how this applies to concessions there, which, for some, may lead to ‘significant changes’.  “If the results are helpful, FSC will endeavour to support similar exercises in other countries of the Congo Basin,” said Mr Ball.

He also explained that, as they currently stand, FSC rules do not require a minimum percentage of IFLs to be protected in addition to other conservation zones concession managers have ‘delimited’. “Neither do the rules require that a percentage of the whole concession be protected,” he said. “The rules as adopted in Cameroon and the Republic of Congo (and shortly to be adopted for Gabon) require 50% of IFLs falling within the concession be protected. If only 10% of a concession is IFL, then that would mean only 5% of the concession would be affected. Furthermore, if existing conservation zones partly or fully overlap with IFLs, then some or all of the IFL protection obligation will already have been delivered.”

Mr Ball also apologized for ‘poor guidance’ issued earlier by  the FSC issued to the Congo Basin RWG. FSC rules also require that standard development groups (SDGs) develop national standards with ‘vast majorities of IFLs’ protected in ‘core areas’ and that, unless they reflect this requirements, a default applies where ‘the core area’ comprises at least 80% of the IFL. The FSC’s clarification stated that the term ‘vast majorities’ meant at least 50% of IFLs in concessions needed to be protected in core areas. “We at FSC acknowledge that better guidance should have been issued to the Congo Basin RWG around the ‘vast majority’ requirement, and apologize for the upset caused by our failure in this case,” he said.

The focus of the online 2020 Sustainable Tropical Timber Coalition’s Conference on November 19 will be the need to seize the opportunity of post-pandemic reconstruction to establish a greener economic model.  

Specifically, the Conference will examine how driving the uptake of certified sustainable tropical forest management by growing the market for sustainable tropical timber can and must be part of the process of green recovery and building a circular bioeconomy. The title of the event is ‘Holding the line: roots for green recovery’.

The circular bioeconomy will be a core theme and the subject of presentations and panel discussion. Speakers will address how the model works, its goals and the place of the timber sector, notably the tropical timber sector, in a bioeconomic future. They include Lee White, Gabon’s Minister of Water and Forestry, who is responsible for implementing the government ruling that all forest concessions in the country must be certified sustainable by 2022. And Hugo Schally, Head of Sustainable production, products and consumption, DG Environment who is coordinating and developing the European Commission’s work on the links between trade and environment as well as on deforestation and forest degradation.

Also speaking is circular bioeconomy expert Jeroen Nagel of the Netherlands infrastructure agency Rijkswaterstaat. Joining them on the panel will be John Williams of environmental science, research, engineering and technical solutions provider RSK and Maria Smith, Director of sustainability and physics at Buro Happold.

The Conference will also explore how the tropical timber sector has tackled the Covid- 19 challenge on the ground. There will be input from INTERHOLCO, which manages over 1 million ha of certified forest in the Republic of the Congo (RoC), and Belgian-based international timber trader Vandecasteele Houtimport. Tropical timber companies have been highly proactive in implementing Covid-19 prevention and treatment strategies, with another RoC-based operation commenting that the pandemic had ‘underlined the importance of investing in health as part of sustainable ecosystem management’.

Following a break and networking, the subject will be innovation in forest and chain of custody certification and its importance for bioeconomic development. Speakers will include Iwan Kurniawan of The Borneo Initiative and Liesbeth Gort of FSC Netherlands.

The role of the STTC itself going forward in supporting certified sustainable tropical timber market growth will be addressed by Chih-Ching Lan of IDH-The Sustainable Trade Initiative.

Closing, Lee White will issue a ‘call for action’, urging the sustainable tropical timber sector to play its part and maximise its opportunities for development as the world moves to a new bioeconomic model.

Targeted at a broad audience, from STTC partners and participants, through timber traders and federations, to concession holders, NGOs and policy makers, the Conference will be moderated by Peter Woodward. The platform opens on November 19 at 8.30 a.m. CET and the event will close around 1 p.m. To register click here.

ISEAL, the international association for sustainability standards, has entered a collaboration with Gold Standard, the organisation dedicated to ensuring the wider environmental integrity of carbon impact reducing projects. The goal is to provide companies with a means of demonstrating that certified products, including timber, are not just sustainable, but also that their supply is geared to minimising greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 

The mission of Gold Standard, which was created in 2003 by the WWF and other NGOs, is to ‘catalyse more ambitious climate action to achieve global goals through robust standards  and verified impacts’. Its partnership with ISEAL , of which the FSC is a member and PEFC a subscriber, will see development of guidance and systems for companies to consistently quantify emission reductions achieved  through ‘supply chain interventions’, so they can be reported in their  GHG inventories.

“The growing urgency of the climate emergency has led to increased demand for credible guidance to support corporations’ transition towards net-zero carbon emissions,” states ISEAL. “For companies, the largest sources of emissions are often linked to supply chains and accounting for them can be challenging. Large emissions sources may lie far upstream in deep and complex supply chains, leading to obstacles to data availability, quality and traceability. This innovation [in partnership with Gold Standard] would allow companies sourcing certified products to better achieve emissions targets, while enhancing the value of commodity certification. Thus the benefits of a climate intervention can be transferred along certified supply chains from landscape to purchasers and investors.”

It added that founding the system at landscape level in supplier countries and regions was key. “Emissions of many of the world’s major commodities are calculated using a ‘supply shed’ approach [whereby suppliers in a given area are grouped in a ‘shed’], with values linked to specific regions. The [new] project will explore how supply-shed boundaries can be set at a landscape level, allowing for standardised landscape emission calculations,” states ISEAL. “[It will] support the value, allocation and transferability of emissions factors linked to certified commodities sourced from a given landscape, with attributes reportable in line with leading corporate reporting protocols.” It added that the approach could also ‘drive large-scale collective action for landscape-level funding’.

The guidance developed by the Gold Standard/ISEAL partnership will be tested by ISEAL members and corporate partners, with results shared via an online community platform.

“We intend to start the piloting phase in April 2021 and this should last until the end of the year when we will report our findings,” said Gold Standard Programme Manager Matthew Thomas. “During the programme we will be consulting with participants on the draft guidance and launching a public consultation at COP26.”

For more information: Matthew.Thomas@goldstandard.org.