Forests: Study Compares Competing Certification Programs
Copyright 2001 Environment and Energy Publishing, LLC Greenwire
October 22, 2001
By Damon Franz, Greenwire staff writer
In an effort to end a sometimes heated debate over two different brands of "certified lumber" sold in the United States, the two certification groups and the nation's largest lumber retailer have unveiled an intensive comparison of the groups' practices. Although the report does not explicitly answer the question of which group -- the Forest Stewardship Council or the Sustainable Forestry Initiative -- has the higher standard, both groups praised the report, saying it would help lumber retailers and consumers make informed decisions.
Certified lumber -- wood from a company that has had its forestry practices given the environmental thumbs-up by ecological experts -- has grown in popularity over the past few years, driven by increasing consumer concern over environmental issues. In fact, Home Depot, the nation's largest lumber retailer, agreed two years ago to give buying preference to certified lumber, and demand for the wood has outstripped supply. But with two different certification groups reviewing forestry practices in very different ways, the definition of "certified wood" can get fuzzy, leading to confusion among consumers and retailers. And that confusion has led to debate between environmentalists and timber producers over what the certification labels mean.
For example, this summer an environmental group embarked on a campaign to have Maine's largest timber producers subject their practices to review by the international, nonprofit FSC to have their wood certified. Some timber producers responded by saying they already had their practices certified by the industry-sponsored SFI, touching off an argument over which program offered the "true" ecological standard.
The recent review, jointly funded by SFI, FSC and Home Depot, does not answer that question, but rather analyzes both programs to let consumers and retailers make a decision based on the details of each particular program. The report, conducted by the nonpartisan Meridian Institute, essentially says the two programs have different goals, and thus use different criteria in judging logging operations.
"This is the first time there has been a top to bottom review of both programs," said Home Depot representative John Simley. "We had intended that to be a tool for the industry, retailers and manufacturers."
Simley said that among some groups, the "breadth and depth of FSC is seen as a more effective route," while others see SFI as more effective because it gets more companies to participate. "It's hard for anyone to say that one or the other is wrong," he said, although he noted that since Home Depot began giving preference to certified wood in 1999, it has recognized only FSC as a certifier. While the company said it would recognize any equivalent standard, it has yet to give recognition to SFI.
SFI representative Mike Klein said his group is pleased with the study. "It shows there are a lot of similarities between the programs and a lot of differences as well. It will serve as an effective scorecard for purchases or individuals who are looking to compare the programs. ... It is important to have an honest, objective scorecard."
Klein said his only criticism of the study is in failing to recognize that "both of these programs are moving targets and both have made enhancements since the study," he said. "A lot of the criticism that FSI has taken in the past has been addressed. Chemical use is one of the ways the two programs have varied, and FSI has made its policy on the issue similar to SFC's."
Debbie Cohen of FSC also applauded the study, saying its authors "did an excellent job."
In summing up the study's findings, Cohen said, "SFI establishes baseline standards in order to encourage improvements, while the FSC has a high standard that must be met for exemplary management."