| American Forests and Paper Association (AF&PA) Sustainable Forestry Initiative | Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Sustainable Forest Management Systems Standards | Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) | International Organization for Standardization (ISO) - 14000 EMS series | |
| History and Description of the Initiative | AFPA's SFI has developed principles and guidelines related to various aspects of forest management on the basis
of which companies develop their own policies and implantation plans. Developed in 1995, SFI essentially raises the floor of minimum standards of forest management and aims to improve the image of US forest products industry. As SFI is a condition for membership in AFPA, the organization has lost 10-15% of its membership from companies which did not wish to participate. |
EMS standard (similar to ISO) to be used by Canadian forestry companies. Developed as partnership between Canadian Pulp and Paper Association, and CSA, the premier Canadian technical standards association. Standards were published in October 1996 and companies representing over 20 million acres have begun certification process. Initiative has generated widespread interest within Canadian industry. |
Set up in 1993 to promote good forest management and with goal of rewarding those producers with exceptional
social and environmental performance. FSC accredits certifiers who provide on the ground certification of sustainable forestry practices. Since inception has broadened goal to focus on vast areas of forest in Europe and North America. Membership dominated by environmental NGOs (ENGOs) and social NGOs, with few industry members |
IS014000 is Environmental Management System similar to well-known ISO 9000.Focuses on management processes
and continuous improvement. First time ISO has dealt with environmental issues. Companies develop their own EMS using ISO guidelines and their performance can be audited against their standard. Industry has pushed ISO to develop guidelines for application to forestry. Development of ISO forestry specific system has proved slow and is several years out, but ISO has inspired several country initiatives. |
| Supporters | US industry, Magazine Publishers of America and other customers. | Canadian industry and government. Major customers such as, Newspaper Society of UK. | Environmental organizations, certified companies, indigenous groups. | Industry groups in UK, Canada, and elsewhere. |
| Communication Orientation or Marketing Strategy | SFI set up in part to head off federal and state regulations. Industry wants to improve image in eyes of public, government, and customers |
CSA standards developed in response to concerns about UK markets. Canadian industry wants to improve performance and needs effective communications tools. |
FSC systems
were originally designed to communicate sustainability message to retail consumers, but current goals much broader. Used by some companies to communicate sustainability commitment to regulators |
ISO generally used as a means for companies to commit and communicate to suppliers and customers their strategic
focus on quality. ISO 14000 would have a similar orientation, but would focus on environmental management. |
| Verification Mechanism | No third party evaluation required. An advisory group of independent experts will assist in preparation of annual report. | Companies contract third-party auditors who audit and certify environment management systems. | FCS accredits independent, third party certifiers (for-profit or non-for-profit). Companies request that these certifiers carry out the certification process. |
Auditing can be done by companies accredited by the national standards setting bodies. |
| Major Advantages | Raises the goalpost for poor performers in US industry. Has helped bring sustainability to the forefront in US Includes vast amounts of US forestland. |
Will include very large areas of forest in Canada with buy-in by a large percentage of industry. System requires following a rigorous process to lead toon the ground improvement |
FSC system has wide environmental support. On the ground verification. Standard setting process includes many stakeholders. |
ISO enjoys high credibility around the world b/c of rigorous, well-defined procedures. |
| Major Critiques | SFM guidelines too broad and allow companies to set their own policies and programs
with very loose minimal standards. Does not require public disclosure of results. Relies heavily on existing government regulations. Environmental community believes that SFI does not go far enough. Some in industry believe that system must be modified from within to address credibility concerns. |
Allows companies at any level of forest management to be included. Stresses "continual improvement" as opposed to scientific standards. Can't compare companies because no common performance benchmark for evaluation. NGOs strongly oppose this system. Many pulled out of process as they claimed they were not getting a full hearing. |
Industry unhappy with FSC as a whole because of dominance of NGOs; doesn't feel as if it was included fully in their
development. Therefore does not have credibility with industry. Accounts for a very small percentage of forestland. Critics claim the organization is not properly structured, with only five certifiers around the world. Many believe that social criteria smack of "social engineering" inappropriate for companies. |
Doesn't set specific common performance benchmarks re: forest management practices. Companies cannot therefore be evaluated against common standard. Companies set own EMS standards against which they ask third parties to evaluate progress. Development of environmentally related standards typically requires a larger set of stakeholders. Few NGOs have participated in subcommittees that develop the parts of the standards. |