About this site
Providing tropical forest news, statistics, photos, and information, rainforests.mongabay.com is the world's most popular rainforest site. [more]
Sawmill in Honduras. (Photo by R. Butler)
LOGGING: Timber certification, trade restrictions
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
Although as much as 80 percent of tropical timber is consumed internally by producing nations, consumption of tropical
timber by the U.S. and other industrial countries plays a significant role in tropical deforestation. The U.S., with
less than 5 percent of the world's population, consumes 17 percent of the world's output of timber and is the third largest importer
of tropical timber, shelling out more than $800 million annually for 1-1.5 million cubic meters. The best actions
to reduce the damage caused by logging activities are to impose strict restrictions, even banning, imports of certain
tropical hardwoods; developing more sustainable means of extracting rainforest timber; certifying timber with regards
to its origins and whether it was sustainably harvested; and beginning to use alternatives to tropical wood products.
Restricting Timber Trade
Restricting or banning the import of certain tropical woods that
cannot reasonably be harvested without considerable damage to the rainforest—like mahogany, ceiba, and ebony—is a highly controversial issue. Usually the restriction of trade in certain species is established by listing
the species on CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna) but this sometimes just has the effect of driving up prices for banned wood, making harvesting even more profitable. [Nov 17 2002 - Big-leaf mahogany, also known as American mahogany, is listed on Appendix II of CITES]
The restriction of trade by listing certain species on CITES is controversial because the practice tends to discriminate
against developing countries with little consequence to developed nations. Environmental advocates have encouraged
the governments of industrialized countries to list a number of tropical timber species found in tropical countries.
Critics validly argue "who has the right to determine which species are listed?" What are the rights
of the affected country? What compensation is due to the affected country? Can we reasonably expect developing
countries to absorb the economic costs imposed by industrialized countries?
These questions should be addressed to ensure relative equality in the international market and to make the
program viable. In addition, the listing of species on CITES is difficult because of a lack of adequate information
on traded timber species. Few know how many individuals of a particular species exist in the wild and how that
species is affected by trade. Furthermore, trade of particular species is poorly tracked and many harvested species
are difficult to distinguish from one another.
The aim of restricting trade of tropical tree species is to slow deforestation caused by the extraction of certain
tree species. The hope is that listing a species will essentially take it off the open market, reducing forest
clearing for its specific harvesting.Though illegal logging and smuggling will thrive, total traffic in the species
would probably decline.
The national response to slow the depletion of timber resources or increase revenue has been to restrict the export
of raw logs and encourage the exports of value-added products like sawnwood and furniture. The idea is that instead
of exporting raw materials at a low profit, you can increase national revenue by exporting products that have a
higher value and stimulate domestic industry. Burma (Myanmar) has recently decided to phase out log exports and
foster the development of value-added product industries, although illegal logging in the country is still rampant and large amounts of timber are smuggled out of the country via Thailand.
A second national response to widespread logging is to issue a temporary moratorium on all logging operations so
the government can assess the situation and regain control of things. In recent years, Suriname, Guyana, Papua New Guinea, Brazil, and the Democratic Republic of Congo have all issued such moratoriums in response to the accelerating inflow of foreign timber firms.
However, such moratoriums are difficult to uphold, especially with understaffed forestry departments. Felling often
continues, and temporary export bans are easily bypassed with widespread smuggling, often in conjunction with political figures
or the military.
Timber Certification
FSC-certified forests at the close of 2005
Region
Area Million hectares
Countries
Sites
Africa
1.69
3
33
Asia-Pacific
2.37
11
63
Europe
34.15
29
324
Latin America
8.05
17
201
North America
20.9
2
123
International trade in forest products is affected by environmental concerns, though trade actions alone cannot
ensure the sustainable management of forests. Timber certification operates on the assumption that consumers are
willing to pay a premium on products harvested in a sustainable manner, by labeling such products with a "seal
of approval." One of the better-known timber certification agencies is the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), an international non-profit membership-based organization which confirms that timber and other forest products are coming from sustainably managed forests. As of January 2006, FSC has
certified more than 166 million acres (67.2 million ha) of forest in 57 countries.
In addition to timber certification, eco-labeling has the potential to discourage companies from unsustainable
production processes. The international trade community originally mandated that eco-labeling of all products be
implemented before 2000, a requirement that causes problems for countries like Indonesia who rely heavily on
rainforest decimation for their economy. With eco-labeling, consumers will know if the product comes from sustainably
managed forest, and will be able to make a choice.
In recent years, the number of timber certification schemes has skyrocketed, although the impact on trade has been
almost negligible to date. Only a small number of products are effectively included, and certified timber products
are only successful in certain environmentally conscious markets like West Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK.
In order to be successful, there must be enough market demand to give incentive for producers to sustainably manage
their resources. Otherwise,there will be no immediate economic justification for producers to seek eco-labeling.
There are several challenges facing the certification movement, which will have an increasing impact over the next
several years, including: a limited number of forests that can meet the strict requirements of certification, the
lack of an adequate definition of what constitutes sustainable forestry, a limited consumer interest in products
from sustainably managed forests, the ignorance of forest owners on how to meet certification standards, and the increasingly
hostile international relations between forest-product producer and consumer countries. Of these challenges, the
last is probably the most significant. Critics and supporters alike realize that certification, like CITES, can
act as a sort of non-tariff trade discrimination. Those countries (usually developing countries) which are unable
or unwilling to manage forests in a sustainable way will suffer in the international market place, while consumer
countries like the United States and Europe will be relatively unaffected. This trade barrier may exacerbate
hostility to international trade and cause regions to polarize, with developing countries siding against industrialized
countries. Already there is evidence of such alliances in the face of human-rights issues: ASEAN (the Association
of Southeast Asian Nations) admitted Burma to the union, an act that strained relations between the group, the
European Community and the United States. Many tropical countries see such forestry management suggestions
and schemes as a threat to their sovereign rights.
Aspects usually overlooked in certification schemes are post-harvesting processing, energy use, waste
disposal, and transport. All of these processes can have a significant impact on the environment and should be considered
in certification.
Ending Subsidies
Perhaps a more effective national response is to end subsidies that stimulate deforestation. By ending subsidies
for sawmills and road construction, logging of tropical rainforests will more accurately reflect the true
costs of harvesting. For example, in several African countries extraction and production costs outpace revenues
so that cash-poor governments end up essentially subsidizing the logging industry. In Indonesia, where ex-president
Suharto's circle of wealthy friends in the timber and plantation industries used to get large tax breaks, the government
kept pulp-wood prices artificially low, using subsidies to ensure that paper mills were profitable. These types of subsidies
are not in the national interest, since they benefit only a small group of individuals.
Review questions:
What is sustainable forestry? Can logging be sustainable?
How does timber certification work?
How can Western consumers help encourage eco-friendly logging?
