Understandably, \u201cforest certification\u201d remains a rather obscure issue to most Americans.\u00a0 Its regulation, however, significantly impacts the price consumers pay for wood products, not to mention the struggling domestic timber industry.<\/p>\n
So what is \u201cforest certification?\u201d\u00a0 It simply refers to formal recognition from organizations like the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI), the American Tree Farming System (ATFS) or the Forestry Stewardship Council (FSC) that a particular business responsibly manages its property in a way that promotes sustainability.\u00a0 Those three certification groups set different benchmarks, some more achievable for various landowners than others.\u00a0 A free and open certification market that allows businesses to choose the system that best fits their profile, and allows consumers to choose, has resulted in a larger amount of \u201cgreen\u201d products in consumer and building markets. \u00a0Additionally, the number of acres of certified land grows by millions of acres each year.<\/p>\n
A vocal group of environmental activists, however, only endorses FSC certification and seeks to make it a monopoly while demonizing the competing forest certification systems.\u00a0 Those activists successfully bullied Fortune 500 companies into accepting the exclusive use of FSC-certified products, and many government and rating agencies only recognize and award green \u201ccredits\u201d to forest products recognized by FSC.\u00a0 As a result, the market becomes distorted, with real costs for producers of wood and the environment, and fewer choices for consumers. \u00a0And in an unfortunate turn of events, recent government overreach prevents a majority of American businesses who took the time and invested their resources to achieve certification from entering green markets.\u00a0 The U.S. Green Building Council\u2019s (USGBC) LEED rating system only recognizes FSC-certified wood as sustainable, which means SFI or ATFS timber cannot enter LEED projects. \u00a0Even though the USGBC is a nonprofit group, many government agencies now accept its word as gospel, and make its standards binding for receiving contracts.<\/p>\n
That weakens the incentives for landowners to certify their land, because if they cannot market their goods in LEED markets, why bother to absorb the real costs (financial, time, compliance) associated with certification?\u00a0 If SFI and ATFS goods are blocked from green markets, and the cost of FSC-certification is too steep, many businesses will opt out altogether.<\/p>\n
The better policy is to encourage sustainable development of our nation\u2019s forests by recognizing all<\/em> credible forest certification program options.<\/p>\n