Takuyuki Yoshioka

Effects of acquiring FSC forest management certification for Japanese enterprises using SmartWood Audits

We explore the organizational, environmental, and economic effects of sustainable forest management (FM) certification by Smart-Wood (SW), one of the certification bodies accredited by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) to carry out certification in Japan. We closely investigated three enterprises: the Yusuhara Forest Owners’ Cooperative, Yamanashi Prefectural Forest, and Ryujin-mura Forest Owners’ Cooperative. Interviews with representatives of these entities provided crucial empirical information regarding the influence of certification on environmental assessment, rare-species protection, landscape-management planning, management objectives, and forest supervision. Attainment of FM status improved environmental awareness and engendered positive changes in assessing and managing forests and other natural resources but simultaneously imposed heavier economic costs.

Improvement of forest management in Asia, through assessment of Forest Stewardship Council certification

The purpose of this study was to compare the present condition of forest management in Asian countries using results of evaluations from Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification bodies. In recent years, the number of FSC-certified forests has increased in Asia. Our investigation examined certified forests in Asian countries, which, as of 2009, accounted for 2.39% of total global certified forest area (2,761,603 ha). Materials were taken from summary evaluations published by each FSC certification body on its respective website. The FSC uses 10 principles and 56 criteria in its evaluation. We investigated the items that the FSC certification bodies consider to be areas that require improvement. Of these principles and criteria, the following were cited by the certification bodies as RI (requiring improvement) in nearly all Asian countries: principle four, “community relations and workers rights”; principle six, “environmental impacts”; principle seven, “management plan”; and principle eight, “monitoring and assessment”. In addition, there were differences corresponding to each country with respect to the other principles and criteria. Laos, Indonesia, and Malaysia in particular were found to have a number of problems. Thus, while there were differences in the principles that qualified as RI in each country, there were also common weak points that require improvement throughout the continent. Asian countries should be mindful of these deficiencies and take measures to improve them, in order to achieve sustainable forest management practices.