Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification

The Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification Schemes (PEFC ) ( German: certification system for sustainable forest management, PEFC ) is an international forest certification system. It is the world's largest independent organization to ensure continuous improvement and sustainable forest management while ensuring environmental, social and economic standards. An important alternative certification system exists by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC).

Naming

After the accession of non-European members in 2002, the original name of Pan European Forest Certification has been changed on the seventh General Assembly of the PEFC in October 2003 in the Programme for Endorsement of Forest Certification Schemes (Program recognition of forest certification systems ).

PEFC- based content on the agreements that have been established by the European Ministerial Conferences on the Protection of Forests in Europe, and towards the end of the 1990s, mainly due to the initiative of representatives of the Forestry and Forest Products was founded as the German Forestry Council. Various environmental organizations, social organizations, the timber industry and other organizations participate in PEFC. Employees are free this and should not yet stakeholders will continue to be possible.

Forest certification

Currently, 258 million hectares of forest have been certified according to PEFC world. In Germany there are 7.3 million ha of two thirds of the native forest. In Austria are certified with around 2.7 million ha two-thirds of the total forest area.

PEFC standards

Met by the forest owners PEFC standards with the principles of natural forestry. Here is an excerpt from the guideline for sustainable forest management for the integration of the forest owner in the regional context:

• Mixed stands of site-adapted tree species are to maintain or build
• Clearcuts are generally refrain
• An adequate supply of deadwood is to receive,
• The use of pesticides should be avoided ( report required )
• On the protected habitats and protected areas and endangered animal and plant species is special consideration to take

In early 2005 came a revised edition of the standards into force for Germany. The changes took into account the recent developments within the MCPFE and the insights that had arisen during inspections of certified companies ( as it became apparent that the driving on the inventory area is one of the most frequent disregard of the regulations ). The innovations are found primarily expressed in six guidelines to facilitate the firms, the implementation of the standards ( eg dead wood management). Also taken into account some emergencies such measures in the event of an oil spill.

Certification process

In Germany, the PEFC system is structured as follows: There is a regional certification instead. On the basis of a regional forest report, which records all relevant data to the woods in a state, and every five years allows for a monitoring of development, forest owners can undertake to comply with the PEFC standards. Every year a representative number of participating forestry companies is checked by independent certifiers ( in 2007, 52% of PEFC -certified area controlled by the sampling ). If violations are found, threatens the forest owner of the exclusion from the PEFC system. After the exclusion of forest owners may not sell PEFC certified wood as his.

Because of the regional approach PEFC is cost effective and especially suitable for the typical European family forest enterprises. Other countries whose respective system must be recognized by the international PEFC umbrella organization, but do not have the kleinparzellierten ownership structures, also make use of a group or individual certification. The PEFC Council, which belong to national representation in 35 countries on five continents, was founded in 1999 and headquartered in Geneva.

Chain of Custody certification

For the flow of wood from the forest to the consumer, the PEFC system has developed a chain of custody certification. In it are given two options: either the physical separation or the input-output accounting. The PEFC logo may only appear on a product if at least 70 % of the wood contained is PEFC certified. For non- PEFC - certified material, which is processed products labeled, it must be shown that this does not come from controversial wood sources such as illegal logging. The certification carried out by the third -party auditing principle. This means that the testing laboratories must be independent of the manufacturer.

Accreditation of certification bodies

The independence of the certifier should be ensured in PEFC by the fact that in accordance with internationally valid ISO rules, the certifier is not accredited by the PEFC itself, ie be authorized to check the certified companies. This requires approval by the national accreditation body.

Criticism

Criticism of the PEFC is mainly through non-governmental organization on the environment, as practiced, for example, Robin Wood. Be criticized following points:

• Regional certification, which means that on individual firms would not necessarily tested for compliance with the criteria.
• Preliminary checks were not performed, but only causes subsequent audit. That makes the system cheaper but not better.
• The standards are not "performance -based" ( ie they are formulated so that the forestry operations remain a relatively wide room for interpretation in the implementation of standards and therefore should not forest owners to change his Bewirtschaftsungspraxis ).

The forest policy background of debates about certification schemes such as PEFC is relevant in assessing the criticism by forest policy actors such as Robin Wood. For critical discussions comparisons in particular for the first global certification system Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) are drawn, which was founded ( at this time, with the primary objective of protection and sustainable use of tropical rain forests) on the initiative of the major international environmental NGOs Greenpeace and WWF as part of the UNCED was decided. The decision to create an alternative certification scheme is to be understood as a reaction to the establishment of the FSC, as the majority of small private forest holdings looked at the design of the FSC for too bureaucratic and thus unnecessarily costly, and are severely under-represented in decision-making felt ( the Forestry - and the timber sector as a whole there has a voting weight of one-third ). Furthermore, Central European forestry operations a priori not subject to sustainable management ( see second point of criticism ). A condensed version of the critical debates therefore shows a positioning of the forestry, wood and paper industry for the PEFC, the environmental groups argue against this.

Criticism is, however, also practiced by independent organizations. In 2002, Öko-Test PEFC rated only "sufficient", while FSC and nature of land were " very good". The Advisory Council on the Environment compares in its Environmental Report 2012, the PEFC with the FSC and called it a much weaker, it's not one of the " high environmental standards ".