Is forest certification working on the ground? Forest managers perspectives from the northeast U.S

Bibliographic Data

ID19587010
AuthorsAlex K George (0000-0001-7573-2845, University of Maine), Anil Raj Kizha (0000-0002-5274-2255, University of Maine, corresponding author), Adam Daigneault (0000-0002-8287-8727, University of Maine)
Year2022
Volume7
Pages100197
Publication date2022-03-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueTrees Forests and People (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2666-7193 • E-ISSN: 2666-7193
PublisherElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1016/j.tfp.2022.100197
OpenAlexW4205695640
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited25

Forest certification programs (FCP) are intended to preserve the environmental, social, and economic values of forests to ensure sustainable management and assured incentives for forest managers in the form of price premiums and market access. In contrast, FCP have not delivered price premiums while also increasing financial and bureaucratic burdens on forest managers. This study used a survey-based approach to obtain the perspectives of forest managers from the northeast U.S. on third-party FCP and possible solutions for their improvement. Among the 157 completed surveys, 85 respondents were involved with FCP, and 38 of those had more than 15 years of experience with certification. There was a significant difference between the responses from consulting foresters and land management companies, respondents from Maine and other states, and respondents with more and less than 15 years of experience with certification programs. Social license (reputation) was the most important reason for getting certified, while market price premium was ranked the least important. Respondents largely agreed on the need to reduce the frequency of surveillance audits for continuously certified management units. They were also generally satisfied with the work quality of the certification auditors and believed logger certification made auditing more convenient. Many embraced adopting region- and stakeholder-specific certification standards. Other reported challenges of FCP included the lack of price premiums and increased cost and complexity of certification. Survey findings helped identify several strategies to improve FCP within the study region and beyond

Audit · Business · Certification · Certified wood · Economics · Forest management · Geography · Incentive · License · Management · Political science · Price premium · Public relations · Reputation · Stakeholder · Willingness to pay · Forest Management and Policy · Global trade, sustainability, and social impact · Regulation and Compliance Studies · Accounting · Forestry

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access