Johanna Johansson

Local Consequences of Applying International Norms: Differences in the Application of Forest Certification in Northern Sweden, Northern Finland, and Northwest Russia

Forest certification, developed in the early 1990s, is a process in which independent assessors grant use of the certification label to producers who meet certain environmental and social criteria set for their forest products. This label was quickly seen to offer a market advantage and to signal corporate social and environmental responsibility. This paper focuses on international norms pertaining to environmental and indigenous rights, as manifested in cases of Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)- and Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC)-compatible certification, and how these norms have been applied domestically and perceived locally in different states. Case studies are drawn from northern Sweden, northern Finland, and three regions in northwest Russia. The studies illustrate that the choice and implementation of certification type depend considerably on national infrastructure and market characteristics and result in substantial differences in the impact that international norms have at the local level.

In the eye of the stakeholder: The challenges of governing social forest values

This study examines which kinds of social benefits derived from forests are emphasised by Swedish stakeholders and what governance modes and management tools they accept. Our study shows that there exists a great variety among stakeholders’ perceptions of forests’ social values, where tourism and recreation is the most common reference. There are also differences in preferred governance modes and management where biomass and bioenergy sectors advocate business as usual (i.e. framework regulations and voluntarism) and other stakeholders demand rigid tools (i.e. coercion and targeting) and improved landscape planning. This divide will have implications for future policy orientations and require deliberative policy processes and improved dialogue among stakeholders and authorities. We suggest that there is a potential for these improvements, since actors from almost all stakeholder groups support local influence on governance and management, acknowledged and maintained either by the authorities, i.e. targeting, or by the stakeholders themselves, i.e. voluntarism.

Why do forest companies change their CSR strategies? Responses to market demands and public regulation through dual-certification

Certification represents a comparatively new means of CSR, which is important in the forest industry. Forest companies and industries have previously certified their management and products in accordance with one of the competing systems (FSC: Forest Stewardship Council and PEFC: Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification Schemes), but recently, important large-scale companies in several countries have started to certify under both schemes. This study explores the causes and effects of this change in strategies, drawing on semi-structured interviews with Swedish forest companies and industries and European retailers. The results show that public bodies, not the least in the EU, as well as ENGOs, have transformed customer demands, resulting in dual-certification. This change in strategies has the potential to alter corporate environmental practices throughout the supply chains. These results call for further research on the under-studied issue of the interaction between public regulation and private forest governance.

Coordinating and implementing multiple systems for forest management : implications of the regulatory framework for sustainable forestry in Sweden

The complexity of multi-level governance is well illustrated by forest management in one of Europe’s large forested states, Sweden. Deregulated government policies emphasize ‘freedom with responsibility’, largely expecting the forest sector to determine ways in which policy goals and legal requirements are reached. In relation to this, Sweden has become one of the countries with the largest share of forests certified by third-party organizations, such as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), in accordance with specific environmental and social criteria. This multi-level case study draws on official documents and semi-structured interviews to analyze Swedish forest governance; specifically, the impact of multiplicity and complexity of environmental considerations on agreement over goal coordination, implementation, and evaluation for feedback and accountability. This contributes to previous research by analyzing interactions between state regulation and certification at multiple levels.

Towards democratic and effective forest governance? The discursive legitimation of forest certification in northern Sweden

Forest certification, particularly that of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), is frequently claimed to constitute an effective and democratic private governance arrangement for responsible forestry. It has, however, recently been questioned whether this view holds true for the northernmost countries, which have traditionally been presented as successful examples of forest certification. Yet there is little research on the perceived legitimacy of forest certification at the local level, which is where the standard implementation takes place. This paper examines how the perceived legitimacy of forest certification is created as well as challenged at the local level in Sweden, drawing on Steffeks [2009. Discursive legitimation in environmental governance. Forest Policy and Economics, 11, 313–318] conceptualisation of discursive legitimation and Bernsteins [2011. Legitimacy in intergovernmental and non-state global governance. Review of International Political Economy, 18 (1), 17–51] definition of legitimacy as well as semi-structured interviews with forest companies, reindeer husbandry (indigenous Sámi) and environmental non-governmental organisations (ENGOs). The results reveal that local ENGOs question the FSCs decision-making process and results, while both the ENGOs and reindeer husbandry see few opportunities to influence long-term forest management. These findings highlight the difficulties of managing power asymmetries in certification and the challenges involved when certification standards are translated from policy to practice.