|
 |
|
Zertifizierung
Dear Glenn,
I am writing in response to your "Overview and Commentary" dated 30 July
2001, in the hope that your subscribers will have the opportunity of reading
the views of those you accuse of "bastardizing" forest certification.
You say the FSC principles and criteria fail to define the circumstances in
which logging of "old growth forest wildlands" is acceptable. The FSC
principles are, of course, deliberately broad to avoid top-down
"one-size-fits-all" prescriptions and to permit development of more precise
standards by certifiers and regional stakeholders. Principle 6.2 requires
safeguards to protect rare, threatened and endangered species and their
habitats as well as the creation of appropriate conservation zones and
protected areas. Principle 9 requires forest managers to identify high
conservation value forests (HCVF) and conserve the relevant values. HCVF is
a new and inclusive concept for defining which forests deserve highest
conservation priority – taking into account biological factors,
environmental services, and social values. While "old growth" is clearly a
conservation priority in countries that have lost most of their natural
forest, it translates less well as a prioritizing concept to countries rich
in natural forest, or inhabited forests where the line between new and old
growth is difficult to draw. Also many forests that have high biodiversity
or important social values would not qualify as old growth (e.g. the
tembawang forest gardens of Kalimantan). You should also be aware that the
concept of "wildlands" or "wilderness" is offensive to many forest dwelling
communities when used by others to describe their ancestral domains.
You call for a return to the 1980's neocolonialism of boycotts on tropical
timber, even though the rich world shows no willingness to pay for the
conservation it desires in poorer tropical countries. A well-subscribed
boycott discriminates against all tropical producers and offers no incentive
for improvement. Certification, imperfect as it is, defines a path for
tropical forest managers to follow. Certified forestry may offer less
protection to biodiversity than the utopia of vast tracts of strictly
protected forest, but is vastly preferable to the reality in many parts of
the tropics of repeated cycles of reckless logging or straight out forest
clearance.
You are quick to condemn the FSC over the grant of a single certificate in
Sumatra. Two major strengths of the FSC are that certification assessments
are public documents and that aggrieved parties may lodge complaints. The
FSC's elaborate and transparent grievance procedures are designed to take
into account the many different stakeholders in forestry and the
inevitability of differences in opinion. In the Sumatran case, complaints
have been lodged and the jury is still out. Commentary prejudging the
outcome from afar, or deriding the ability of the FSC system to deal with
those complaints, is surely unhelpful.
You chastise WWF for working with unnamed logging companies. Without knowing
the specifics of your concerns, WWF remains open to providing advice to any
company that genuinely wants to improve its logging practices, on the
premise that conflicts are rarely resolved without dialogue. We would
certainly see it as a positive result if a migratory logging company changed
its spots and achieved certification.
The Papua New Guinea Forest Industry Association would no doubt be as
confounded as I was by your allegation that WWF is "the driving force"
behind logging in PNG. If this refers to WWF technical assistance to local
communities in Gulf Province who are conserving their forests by effectively
managing them, then you should be aware that timber production from these
communities amounts to less than 0.0x% of PNG's industrial timber
production.
Finally, I would urge forests.org to devote less bytes to attacks on the FSC
system and its supporters, and more to constructive suggestions on how the
system can be strengthened. If not, perhaps forest.org risks will
inadvertently support the cause of "meaningless industry sponsored
alternatives" .
Rod Taylor
Asia Pacific Forest Coordinator
WWF International
|
|
|
|
|
|
