1 / 27

Forest Certification in Estonia: Towards Sustainability

Learn about the emergence and impact of forest certification in Estonia, highlighting its importance for biodiversity, social awareness, and economic planning. Discover the challenges faced and the positive effects of certification on the environment and society.

lavender
Download Presentation

Forest Certification in Estonia: Towards Sustainability

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Forest certification in Estonia Rein Ahas Hando Hain Peep Mardiste Institute of Geography University of Tartu

  2. Location of Estonia Area 46 000 km2 Population 1,4 million 70% living in cities

  3. Background

  4. 50% is covered with forestsLow use and good management during Soviet regime created high biodiversity

  5. Today - Estonia is harvesting more (13 mil m3) than annual growth (10 mil m3) Annual felling volumes 1990-2002

  6. Liberal forest policy created illegal forestry Area damaged by Stora Enso in April 2004

  7. Society in transition has special aspects • Consumerism • Need to keep several jobs to consume • Speed of life and changes • Low environmental and social awareness

  8. Fragmented landscapes and properties 80% of private lands are less than 10 hectares

  9. Private forests • 60% private forests • Restitution is still ongoing • Overharvesting and illegal logging happens mostly in private lands

  10. State forest • 40% forests belonging to state • State forest is managed by State Forest Management Centre - RMK • RMK has FSC and ISO 14001 certificate since 2002

  11. The emergence of forest certification

  12. Important steps • 1995 Certification introduced by env. NGOs • 1997 State Forestry Development Program studied certification • 1998 National working group on forest certification • 1999 NEPcon/Smartwood started in Estonia • 2000 First standard • 2001 PEFC initiative • 2002 State forest FSC certified • 2004 FSC working group endorsed

  13. Why certification emerged? • active support of international and local NGOs • NGOs were dissatisfied about liberal forest policy • national forest policy was seeking for alternatives • certification discussions from neighboring countries • market for FSC products emerged

  14. National working group on forest certification (NWGFC) • 1998 - 2000 • 30 active members • Discussion of FSC principles and criteria

  15. Hard discussions between • Environmentalists • Forest survey specialists (planners) and • Forestry scientists and administrators (silvaculturalists) • Industry and social sector were silent

  16. Main discussion topics • Management plan (need, how detail ect) • Melioration, pesticides, introduced species • Limiting clear-cut management

  17. Basic conflict on concept of spring truce • No forest management during breeding season of birds and animals • Had support from society and opposition from industry

  18. NEPcon / Smartwood in Estonia 1999 • Peter Feilberg started certification in Baltic • Office in Tartu • Russian direction

  19. Reaction to certification

  20. Market • 800 000 ha certified • 2 700 000 m3 FSC timber annually produced • Only 0,1% is processed as certified • Local market has no idea of FSC - awareness

  21. Problems • Avareness and activity of stakeholders was and is low, this makes all activities difficult • Sceptic foresters and administrators • No coopertaion between land-owners

  22. Effects of certification

  23. Effects • Discussion started and introduced different thinking (paradigm) and participation • Market (demand from Western Europe) has impact on producers (CoC) • Image of companies is important

  24. Effects Social – work safety and health care improved • Environmental – biodiversity issues, spring truce, waste management, soil protection • Economic – long term planning and thinking

  25. Conclusions • Certification had positive impact • Environemntal awareness is problem • Need for group certification

  26. Research perspectives • How to measure impacts – quantitative and qualitative methods, indicators • Audit data can be used for analyses • Regular research activities and meetings

  27. Suur tänu! Thank you!

More Related