Sustainable Forests

Recently, Bill Mankin, former director of the Global Forest Policy Project, contacted us about about our article, "Wood Furniture: FSC Certified Sustainable"(Nov/Dec GG99) to take issue with our use of the term "sustainable." The Green Guide's editor, Mindy Pennybacker, contacted him. We learned that the question of sustainability is much more knotty and detailed than a single word can convey.

To whom it may concern,

For the last 14 years (ever since I was involved in the founding of the FSC) I have consistently opposed any suggestion or implication that certification—by the FSC or otherwise—equates to an achievement of "sustainability." Thus, I strongly object to my name being used to promote your erroneous contention that FSC products are certified as "sustainable"—which they absolutely are not. In fact, I believe that any suggestion to the contrary is fraudulent. Although I strongly support the FSC (which never makes such a claim), I do not support this kind of misrepresentation of the FSC.

Thank you very much for your kind attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Bill Mankin
Washington, DC

Dear Bill Mankin,

Thank you for your letter. Please accept my apology for The Green Guideissue 99 error, which most glaringly appears in the headline, "FSC Certified Sustainable." I am afraid that it is a surprise to me to learn that the FSC label does not mean that forest products have been sustainably produced. On Consumer Union's ecolabels.org, the headline for the FSC label also reads "Sustainable Wood," and I am afraid this has become a common shorthand for your label among the press.

Thanks for your kind attention.

Sincerely,

Mindy Pennybacker

Hi, Mindy,

Thanks for your prompt response to my objection to your use of the term "sustainable" in relation to certified wood. I am not surprised that this comes as a surprise to you. You and Green Guide, and Consumers Union, and a lot of others are not alone. I'm afraid common shorthand has yet again turned out to be a threat to accuracy and understanding.

The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) has struggled with how to describe itself for years, and the "well managed" language, while extremely boring and not very clear, is the best everyone has been able to do—because the FSC does not want to mislead anyone. My own preference is to say that a "certified" label on a forest product simply means (or claims) that the product has come from a forest management operation that has been determined by someone to meet a specific set of standards. In the FSC's case, their standards are stronger than other systems, and their certifiers are independent. But you have to look at each system's certification standards, as well as its procedures and systems for accreditation and certification, and its independence, to determine whether you like the system or not. Either that or look at its list of members and supporters. There is really no other way. Shorthand shortcuts will only lead you to confusion and very dead ends.

In my view, any certification system or product claim that asserts "sustainability" is either simply misleading or patently fraudulent. And by the way, one of the main reasons this is the case is that there is no agreement abroad in the world, I repeat—none—on what "sustainable" means. I have my own definition, and so do a million others. My own definition led me to steadfastly oppose the FSC's use of the term "sustainable" ever since the FSC's founding 13 years ago—in which I played a small part. Although I strongly support the FSC, even the FSC's standards are not rigorous enough to ensure the achievement of my definition of sustainable forest management. In spite of this, the FSC is far and away the best system out there and comes closer to ensuring and promoting the goal of sustainability than any other. That's why its membership includes a huge crowd of environmental organizations.

Thanks very much for your understanding.

Sincerely,

Bill Mankin
Washington, DC

Dear Bill,

Thanks so much for this cogent explanation! You write very persuasively about the vagueness of the term "sustainability," which we at The Green Guide have struggled with, as well.

In future, we will be certain to list some of FSC's concrete standards to illustrate its sound management requirement.

Sincerely,

Mindy Pennybacker

Forest Stewardship Council

To get the Forest Stewardship Council's perspective on sustainability, Mindy Pennybacker followed up with Ned Daly, FSC's Vice President for Operations. "There are people who don't like the term because it's very hard to determine and may be difficult to achieve," noted Daly, adding, "FSC prefers 'well-managed forests,' which means managed to a higher standard. We're better than 99% of what's out there."

Considering the most important FSC standards, Daly points out that "What really differentiates us is the combining of environmental and social standards. Adding those two things together creates something greater than the two pieces. In the 80's there was a boycott of mahogany and for good reason. But communities in Guatemala were now unable to get any income so they cleared the forest for pasture for grazing or agricultural crops."

On another issue of concern, logging old growth, Daly said that in certain situations FSC will "allow people to cut old growth. You have to prove why this is good and viable management [that will] conserve forests." It's a tricky issue, as he notes that, "You can certify almost anything. There was legislation in California last year, that if trees were older than 250 years, you have to protect those. It hurt some of our best players, and benefitted people who had already pillaged their forests and had only second growth."

Daly also noted that FSC certifies plantations, "but is trying to make sure that they haven't resulted through conversion of native forest and that their plantation is not having a negative impact on natural forests. Plantations use huge amounts of pesticides and herbicides." As he says, "Standing forests is what we're after—conservation strategies across a broad landscape."

Photo courtesy of Paul McRandle. All rights reserved.