5 reasons for being suspicious about the forest certification systems FSC and PEFC

In the latest years, Acréscimo has been noticing more and more reasons to be suspicions about the credibility of forest certification based on the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Endorsement of Forest Certification Program (PEFC) systems, the way they operate in Portugal.

1.     Due to the complicity with unrestrained deforestation situation and uncontrolled spread of exotic species plantations, with high environmental, social and economic risks;  

2.     Due to the suspected absence of permanent monitoring in the deposition of industrial waste in certified forest areas with potential risks to public health, especially to the rural populations;

  

3.     Due to the association, on the chain of custody, to entities involved on public complaint for breach of environmental legislation, with serious situations related to an international river course pollution;

  

4.     Due to the predisposition to take advantage of public funding support through the Common Agricultural Policy and the National Budget (PDR 2020), including the Permanent Forest Fund, to overcome their tenuous expansion in markets under imperfect competition;

  

5.     Due to the lack of transparency on the funding model mechanisms of its activities, especially on the financial flows, directly or indirectly related to demand of industrial oligopolies.

  

Acréscimo considers that the FSC and PEFC certification systems, such as currently applied in Portugal, are shrouded in suspicions that undermine their credibility. Everything leads us to believe that the certification business outstripped the principles underlying the certification.

Acréscimo will question these certification systems international administrations about the credibility of the actions of its partners in Portugal.

Celtejo, environmental crimes and certification

According to public denounce, Celtejo assumes that fails to meet one of the fundamental parameters of the attributed environmental license: the parameter related to oxygen, essential for life. The complaint alleges the practice of environmental crime in the Tejo River, through illegal industrial waste discharges.

Celtejo – Empresa de Celulose do Tejo S.A. is a company that belongs to the universe of the Altri Group, which produces bleached eucalyptus pulp of BEKP type (Bleached Eucalyptus Kraft Pulp)

Celtejo has chain of responsibility certification, issued by the FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) and PEFC (Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification), by the certifying entity APCER.

The forestry chain of responsibility certification requires full compliance with the laws, necessarily including compliance with the conditions of the license awarded by the Portuguese authorities.

This company has also a certification under ISO 14001: 2015.

The complaint was issued by public television channel in Portugal, RTP, on "Sexta às 9", and it’s also available on the broadcaster website

Acréscimo believes that certifications attributed to Celtejo should not be considered valid, given the denunciation of major non-conformity, requiring international audits and re-evaluation, either by the FSC, PEFC and ISO.

The credibility of forest certification in Portugal

The successful achievement of sustainable forest management (SFM) is vital to Portugal, an uncontrolled case of deforestation in Europe.

Forest certification (FC) is a market tool that claims to be based on recognition of SFM.

But, how can FC business coexist with deforestation in Europe?

In Portugal, some family-owners and some of their organizations perform an extra effort to implement SFM on their properties, particularly in forest management groups, investing in is external recognition namely by CF. However, they represent less than 50% of the total area certified in the country.

Recently, certification systems operating in Portugal, as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC), intend to move towards regional certification level. More than that: for this purpose, they would like to use public support, integrated within the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), distorting the principles they should be based on. That is, they want to overcome the outdated poor adherence to this tool - on markets operating in imperfect competition - by the direct support financed by taxpayers. Taxpayers, so, run into the risk of financing an alleged double-charged “transparent” business:  as taxpayers and as consumers.

The coexistence of FC systems with a deforestation situation under no control in Portugal is striking. The country has lost, in a quarter-century, more than one quarter million hectares of its forest area. In annual average, it is the equivalent of Lisbon area - ​​10 thousand hectares per year, since 1990.

Breaches to the Basic Law, the National Forest Strategy and the international commitments assumed by Portugal, in the field of Sustainable Development and of Climate Change and Global Warming, are statistically and successively notorious. The fact is revealed by United Nations (FAO), Eurostat and European Environment Agency reports. But none of them seems to be taken into consideration when one intends to enable the business of FC.

The entities in Portugal, representing FSC and PEFC, have a strong financial dependence of entities that support markets operating through imperfect competition in the country. Portugal has with strong focus on demand, where supply is characterized by 98.4% of the forests under non-public management - more than 80% family-owned. However, that too seems irrelevant to the support of FC business. Even though this market model has been leading to strong consequences in terms of destruction of natural resources, the depreciation of the territory, as the catastrophic spread of forest fires (where the country stands out internationally) and the proliferation of uncontrolled pests and diseases.

The question that arises is whether, at international level, either the FSC or PEFC are colluding with the situation of deforestation in Portugal. Apparently they are! Then, their internal and international credibility would be questionable too!

Isn´t the feasibility of FC, as a business, overlapping the transparency that should be transmitted to the markets?

Is this not an instrument based on hypocrisy?

Deforestation in southern Europe

Tetra Pak, Ikea and Kingfisher initiative to evaluate the impact of FSC forest certification

Acréscimo welcomes the announcement by Tetra Pak, Ikea and Kingfisher regarding the group initiative to evaluate and clarify the role of FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) on forest certification.

For a year, Acréscimo has been requesting to go through technical visits on places where industrial wastes have been disposed on certified forests soils, managed by pulp and paper companies. This has not been authorized yet.

Although being in Portugal for over a decade, the evidence of of the waste disposal motorization in certified forests has not been part of the agenda in the Audits performed under the FSC  schemes.

In addition to the environmental impacts associated with this practice, the consequences of industrial waste application on forest soils can contribute harmful for public health.

Despite of the customers’ benefits of purchasing products from certified forest, the main question is that FSC has not given assurances regarding the monitoring of potential impacts associated with the application of waste on the forests it certifies, especially on forests managed or owned by industrial groups who also produces such waste.

FSC expresses great weakness in its performance in Portugal. This attitude generates strong doubts about its commitment regarding the goals and standards that the system itself has defined. It should be noted that these industry groups represent more than 70% of forests certified by the FSC system in Portugal. Will there be here any “protection” to its customers?

Even being in Portugal for many years, only recently - after the intervention of Acréscimo - FSC Portugal claimed it has initiate the motorization of waste application on certified forests. However, this unique action is clearly insufficient. The issue, in accordance with the FSC International, requires continuous monitoring applications, right from the moment FSC certifies the entities (2007) that practice application of residues on soils under their management.

To be consistent with the objectives and guarantees that it claims to support before the Society, FSC must ensure the existence of instruments for continuous monitoring certified forest areas, subject of to the application of municipal and industrial waste. Its actions must be supported by scientific knowledge produced by independent entities, based on national ecosystems. That does not happen today.

With the announced increase of industrial capacity in paper industry in Portugal, the pressure on FSC is definitely assured.

FSC and PEFC do not guarantee the monitoring of waste disposal in certified forests

For a year, Acréscimo has been requesting to visit places where industrial wastes have been disposed on certified forests soils, managed by pulp and paper companies. This has not been authorized yet.

Acréscimo also developed contacts with the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC), to determine their position on this matter. PEFC has voiced no clarification. FSC International responded, however the information conveyed seems contrary to the practice evidenced nationally.

Although being in Portugal for over a decade, the evidence of motorization of the waste disposal in certified forests has not been part of the agenda in the Audits performed under the FSC and PEFC schemes.

In addition to the environmental impacts associated with this practice, the consequences of application of industrial waste in forestry can contribute harmful for public health.

The possibility of eliminating waste on soils is framed by Directive 86/278/EEC, Council of June 12 (Sewage Sludge Directive), lately transposed into the Portuguese legal regime through Decree-Law No. 276/2009 of October 2.

By implementing the Sewage Sludge Directive, Portugal has the obligation to present triennial monitoring reports, as described in Article 5 of Directive 91/692/EEC of the Council of 23 December. There’s no knowledge of any reports produced after 2009.

In Portugal, the Ministry of Environment supervises waste management, but several studies seriously question the effectiveness of their performance. These studies reveal the lack of information regarding the destiny of the waste, of about 50% of the waste produced in the country. The Ministry of Agriculture maintains that the amounts of waste applied to soils are guided by the precepts of the official manual, which however does not cover forest species. Regarding the eventual supervision activities undertaken by the Ministry of Agriculture in the application of waste on soils, there’s no evidence of the existence of public reports related to the forests surfaces managed by major industrial players, as the Portucel Soporcel and Altri.

In supervision actions, it’s important to consider not only the followed procedures on the application of waste on soils, but mainly the subsequent monitoring of potential impacts on ecosystems and to rural populations.

Despite of the customers’ benefits of purchasing products from certified forest, either the FSC or PEFC have not given assurances regarding the monitoring of potential impacts associated with the application of waste on certified forests, especially on forests managed or owned by industrial groups who also produces such waste. Systematically, they demonstrate to ignore the situation - in the case of PEFC - or express major weakness in their performance - as the case of the FSC. These attitudes generate strong doubts about their commitment regarding the goals and standards their own certification schemes had defined. It should be noted that these industry groups represent more than 60% of forests certified by FSC and PEFC schemes in Portugal.

Despite its presence in Portugal for many years, only this year (2014), and after the intervention of Acréscimo, FSC Portugal claimed to initiate the monitoring of the application of waste on certified forests. However, this unique action is clearly insufficient. The issue, in accordance with the FSC International, requires continuous monitoring applications, right from the moment FSC or PEFC certifies the entities that practice application of residues on soils under their management.

Documentation produced for the European Commission reports several concerns about the application of these wastes on soils related to the level of nitrogen and phosphorus, cadmium and zinc, other inorganic and organic contaminants, gas that affects global warming and odors.

To be consistent with the objectives and guarantees that they claim to support before the Society, either FSC or PEFC must ensure the existence of instruments for continuous monitoring on certified forest areas, subject of to the application of municipal and industrial waste. Their actions must be supported by scientific knowledge produced by independent entities, based on national ecosystems. That does not happen today.

The Portuguese government forecasts for 2020 a production of 750,000 tons of sewage sludge, 78,57% more than in 2010, with the application of 50% on agroforestry soils. Other EU Members are more restrictive regarding the application of these wastes on soils, or not even consider its application, as in Netherlands. In Portugal, the pressure for the application of these wastes on agroforestry soils has been increasing significantly. The estimative of sewage sludge production in 1995 was 145,855 tons, with the application of 60% on agroforestry crops. In 2005 the estimate value pointed to the 401,017 tons of sewage sludge with 56% applied on agroforestry crops. The regions North, Centre, Lisbon and Tejo Valley are particularly prominent in this matter.

With the announced increase of industrial capacity in the pulp and paper industry in Portugal, responsible for more than 60% of the certified forest area in the country, the pressure on FSC and PEFC is definitely assured.

Portugal: best paper, worst forest

Watch the video below.

This looks fantastic, a cause for national pride. But what does this video not show?

• In the last 30 years, the eucalyptus plantations area in Portugal (dominated by the species Eucalyptus globulus) increased 10 times. The country now has the world's fifth largest area of ​​these plantations. However, productivity remains today identical to that recorded in 1928.
• In the last 15 years, the national forest area, in opposite of what happens in the European Union, fell by about 150 000 hectares, corresponding to a net loss rate of -0.3% per year.
• Between 1990 and 2010, the economic weight of the Portuguese forest, valued at the net Added-Value of forestry under the national GVA, lost around 67% -  from 1.2% to 0.4% (in 2012 stands at 0, 5%). The Portuguese forestry sector decreased its weight in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of nearly 40% between 2000 (3.0%) and 2010 (1.8%).
• In social terms, in the last two decades, employment in Portuguese forestry sector showed a sharp decrease between 1995 and 2010, about 160 000 less jobs.
• Regarding the risk, there are particularly prominent statistical records relating to forest fires. Portugal recorded, between 2000 and 2009, about 35% of the burnt area of all five southern Member States of the European Union (Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece and France). The most affected regions in the country are the North and Center, associated with the production of wood, with particular highlight to areas occupied by the maritime pine and eucalyptus regions, mainly privately owned, with predominantly small farms, fragmentation of rustic ownership, owners disorganization - either on technical and commercial issues – where markets are dominated by win-lose relations protagonized by industrial oligopolies protected by political power.

Burned area/year/10 Km2 (2006-2010) - FAO, Unasylva 242

We are not against eucalyptus plantations, when they respect principles of technical, environmental, social and economic nature. We recognize the technological advances in the manufacture of paper in Portugal. But, we do not agree with the forest policy followed by the country in recent decades, in which the pulp and paper sector protectionism has enjoyed political protection at the expense of forest, rural populations and territory.

The country currently has, as the second largest exporter, an industry group of pulp and paper production. However, in overall, exports of forest-based products are much less than it was in the recent past. Eucalyptus plantations have increased substantially in recent decades, but the country experiences a situation of deforestation and the national forest is a victim of rising risks along these same decade impacts.

Now draw your conclusions.