4. ANÁLISIS INTERPRETACIÓN DE RESULTADOS
4.1. Análisis descriptivo de las preguntas de la encuesta dirigida a los docentes
PRODUCTS
The certification of forest products is aimed at linking the timber marketing to sustainable forest management, and at encouraging the final user to buy goods composed only of products taken from sustainably and managed forests. This initiative has been promoted by NGO’s and industrialised countries which are also large-scale imports of forest products, while exporters are trying to generalise the system.
Certification is based on two aspects: firstly, to make external pressure applied through trade a vehicle to oblige improvements in forest management practice, and secondly, to ensure that the market demand for products taken from sustainably managed forests becomes a priority and that the markets are prepared to pay some sort of premium for them (e.g., a higher price, greater demand, a greater market share, etc.). It is still too early to judge the validity of this hypothesis, and thus, in spite of the efforts of many countries, there are still many problems and uncertainties yet to be resolved, some of which are discussed below.
In general, opinions differ widely about the scope and the duration of the economic impact that certification plans can have on the timber trade. At present there is a demand for certain types of environment-friendly or ‘green’ products in some countries, but there is no
50
clear evidence that the volume is significant or that consumers are willing to pay a higher price, apart from the case of select products.
While the effects on trade to date have been small (there are no reliable figures, although it is estimated to affect 0.5% of forest products), the issue is producing a considerable degree of commercial uncertainty in many markets and some concern amongst those involved in the forest product trade, from the producer to the retailer. One of these concerns is that unless this certification is applied with caution, it will act as non-tariff barrier to trade and discriminate against those who cannot or do not wish to achieve the required levels of sustainable forest management. It may also hinder the development of poor countries.
If imports are restricted to sources that have been certified as sustainable, even producers who are in a position to comply with the criteria of sustainable forest management may easily find themselves faced with the serious handicap of having to adapt to the differing requirements of each market.
Certification may also favour industrialised countries where forest management practice is moving towards sustainable objectives.
Although it seems likely that the majority of the plans will be voluntary, they may in fact become compulsory given that certain large-scale retailers such as those in the UK, for example, may not wish to trade in uncertified products and consumers may even prefer to buy artificial products produced from non-wood products, as is happening to some degree in certain European countries. There is also a concern that certification may give the consumer the impression that non-labelled products, especially those that have not been analysed, have bee produced in an environmentally irresponsible way.
Certification is still at an incipient stage. It seems likely, however, that it will have a constantly growing impact, at least in the next few years, although it is still hard to predict the scope and nature of this impact. Some Spanish companies involved in secondary processing have volunteered to join the FSC51
certification system promoted in Spain by ADENA–WWF52. This is an international third party accreditation system backed by the WWF. In another move, the European associations involved in the forest-industry chain have mobilised to establish a system called PEFC53
, the main features of which are: objective accreditation of mutual recognition between countries backed by the Accreditation Treaty amongst European countries, represented in Spain by AENOR, and the potential for certification of sustainable management of small-scale forests at reasonable prices. This system also permits the certification of sustainable management in Mediterranean forests where the indicators match the on-site reality in order to comply with the Helsinki criteria. The European Union is not in favour of establishing an official certification, but rather of encouraging voluntary systems, constantly ensuring that this does not distort Union
51
FSC: Forest Stewardship Council
52
ADENA: Association for the Defence of Nature; WWF: World Wildlife Fund
53
competition internally or externally. The medium-term market effects of these certification systems will depend on a range of factors, but above all on the degree to which certification becomes accepted and trusted by the market. It seems likely that it will start to affect market trends and in the long term, if adopted more widely, may even affect the types of products being sold.
In summary, although it is difficult to predict the direction and scope of certification, it seems most likely that:
x
certification activities will continue to grow, at least in the short to medium term (3-5 years)x
this growth will probably be fast, at least because there is only a small but important area of forests that complies with the strict definitions of good forest managementIt is also important to stress that sustainable forest management, which is ultimately what these systems certify, has certain idiosyncrasies in Mediterranean forests.
At the III Ministerial Conference on Forest Conservation in Europe, the Spanish Ministry of Environment accepted the commitment to readapt the guidelines54 to the reality of the Mediterranean forests.
It is therefore advisable to establish an agreement above the Spanish national level to provide credibility as a sub-regional forum to the demands for sustainable management of Mediterranean forests.
The Iberian Declaration on Principles for sustainable forest management, signed on 29 January 1997 by more than 32 representatives of the public and private sectors in Spain and Portugal is a noteworthy forerunner in this potential move towards Mediterranean certification.
The role of governments in this aspect should be limited to establishing a body, an organisation or an institution that will provide all possible certification systems with sufficient transparency, non-discrimination, equal opportunities for credibility, the same rigour and respect for the rules of open competition, given that this certification will in itself become an object integrated into the market. Governments also play an important role in permitting the comparison of different systems and the resolution of possible litigation between parties.
For the purposes of imported forest products, certification is also being debated in the WTO55
to prevent it from becoming a non-tariff barrier to international trade in wood products.
54
Declaration by the Spanish Environment Minister - Lisbon, 3 June 1998
55
Just as Spain has been one of the leading countries in the production of CITES guides to timber yielding species closed to international trade, and in the light of the medium-term prospects, the European Union may well require certification for its internal market. There is an urgent need to establish a joint programme with the Autonomous Communities with a view to drafting a set of transparent and precise indicators that can be used openly for these purposes.