Community forestry and certification:

Dealing with interfaces between global

standards and local community action K. Freerk Wiersum1, Shoana S. Humphries2 and Severine van

Bommel1 1Forest and Nature Conservation Policy group

Wageningen University, the Netherlands2FSC International, Bonn, Germany

Contents

Evolution in community forestry Development of community forest

certification Present status community forest

certification Experiences with community forestry

certification Conclusion

Institutional characterization of community forestry The ideal picture of

community forestry Community as a locality

with shared norms and local interdependencies

Options for local stimulation of forest conservation and poverty alleviation

• Devolution of forest management decision-making

• Socially embedded• Mobilization of community

experience

The reality in case of commercial timber production Combined processes of

devolution and increased regulation

Need for external inputs• professional knowledge to

meet standards• investment in equipment

and marketing

Evolving commitments regarding community forestry

From To

Create dual forest economyLarge-scale professional forestry versus small-scale community forestry

Incorporate CF in mainstream forestry developments

Forest conservationDecrease local use pressure on valuable forestsRehabilitate degraded lands

Local rightsPoverty alleviation

Basic needs Commercial production & income earning

Four phases in community development

Phase 1 Forest conservation through dual forest sectorLighten pressure on high value forests by meeting forest related needs of local people from village lands

Phase 2 Democratization and empowermentMeet basic needs of rural peopleRecognize rights and knowledge indigenous peopleStimulate local decision-making and control

Phase 3 Joint and collaborative forest managementStimulate multi-level decision-making and benefit sharing between public forestry administration and communities

Phase 4 Incorporation of CF in globalizing financial networksTrain communities in fulfilling global standards

Pathway of community forestry development

1

3

2

4

Commitment to basic needs

Commitment to meet

local forest needs

Commitment to incorporate CF in mainstream forestry

Commitment to income generation

1 – 4 =development phase

Outcome of evolution:Increasing role of multi-actor partnerships

NGO’s Internationalstandards

(amended from Lemos & Agrawal, 2006)

Experiences with application of global standardsThe example of certification of community forestry FSC certification Voluntary system promoted by

governments, NGOs and donors Status in 2008

120 certified CFE 13% of all 933 certified enterprises 3.7% of 103 million ha of certified forest area

Multi-level approach to standard setting

International AssemblyEqual voice and power for: social, environmental, and economic interests, North and South 10 Principles & Criteria Adaptation strategies to stimulate smallholder and

community forestry

National Working Groups National/regional Indicators & Verifiers Adjusted Indicators & Verifiers for smallholder and

community forestry

Present status of FSC certification

FSC Certificates by Area FSC Certificates by Number

Why does FSC care about communities and small producers? Social and ethical commitment to

distribution of certification benefits among different stakeholders.

Communities and small producers are critically important forest managers, controlling substantial forest resources around the world.

Different opinions on added value of certification

Certification as a development tool Highest score, especially amongst communities and NGOs Increased identity & recognition Improved contacts with external world

Certification as a marketing tool for commercial timber enterprises Medium score, relative highest amongst NGOs Better corporate image for timber merchants But no higher prices for producers

Certification as a means to stimulate combined forest conservation and local benefits Lowest score, relative highest amongst NGOs Source: R. Reguera

Challenges for community enterprises

Understanding and proving compliance with FSC certification standards

Paying for certification Difficulty engaging in certified forest products

markets and realizing market benefits Competing with industrial operations in certified

forest products markets.

How to proceed with CF certification:adding objectives or simplifying standards?

FSC Initiatives to stimulate certification for small & community producers

Initial initiatives• SLIMF (small & low

intensity managed forests)

• Eligibility standards

• Streamlined procedures

• Adapted standards

• Group certification

Recent initiatives• FSC-FLO joint

certification

• Community-origin label

• Modular approach to certification

• Contractor-Landowner joint certification

Developing CF certification:an actor-network activity

Local communities as forest managers and forest product sellers

Trading and manufacturing enterprises as marketing partner

Local/(inter)national NGOs as development partner

Independent standardization organisations as certification partner

Multiple contractual arrangements for CFE development

Contradictions between assumed and actual experienced benefits of certification

Conclusion 1

Single-loop learning Learning that does not

question fundamental design, goals and activities

Technical learning about instruments

• SLIM, group certification Common approach to

policy implementation

Double-loop learning Learning that does

question fundamental design, goals and activities

Conceptual learning about goals and strategies

Social learning about e.g. responsibilities, appropriate ways of interacting

Development of CF certification requires double-loopinstead of single-loop learning

Conclusion 2

From advocacy networks for stimulating CF certification Ad-hoc arrangements between

parties from different sectors• Without explicit marketing

analysis• Sometimes specific development

standards added to certification standards

Around pragmatic ideas of linking decentralisation trends and marketing chain development

Aimed at fulfilling global standards for sustainable forest management and international timber trade

To sustainable partnerships for dealing with community products Contractual arrangements

between parties from different sectors

Around integrated community development and conservation goals

Aimed at shared social learning on options for incorporating different types of ecologically responsible community-based production systems in various types of commercial networks

Double-loop learning for effective CF certificationrequires new institutional arrangements

Conclusion

The main focus of community forestry gradually changed From creating dual forest economy to embedding in mainstream forest policy From fulfilling basic needs to income generation through commercialization From advocating local knowledge and autonomy to participation in external

networks The nature of PES schemes is gradually changing

From voluntary schemes to formal government mediated schemes The advent of climate payments involves a partial redirection in

forest policy From decentralisation and devolution of forest policy to state mediation of

global standards In order to profit from climate payments community forestry

should further enhance their power of negotiation at national level

By forming strategic alliances• Development of umbrella organisations• Membership of multi-stakeholder partnerships

By recognizing the specific characteristics of different types of community forestry schemes

Conclusion: Achievements and future development scope

Community forestry has ‘come of age’ No ‘second (hand)’ management strategy in dual forest sector Accepted as socially-desirable and viable approach to forest

management Incorporated in external commercial and policy networks

Changing focus from decentralisation and devolution to multi-level governance

From focus on indigenous knowledge / practice and autonomous decision-making to focus on balancing local norms with fulfilment of professional norms / standards

From focus on organisation and decision-making at local level to focus on partnership arrangements with external organisations

Need to further strengthen role of community forestry organisations as partners in interactive development processes

Formation of strategic alliances• Umbrella organisations• Partnerships with civil society and commercial organisations

Adaptation of global standards to community conditions in a reiterative learning process

Thank you