Why Recycled Paper & Environmental Paper is a Better Paper Choice for Magazines
FSC: The Premier Forest Certification Program
Introduction: Dwindling Forests and Sustainability Efforts
Natural forests are essential to life on earth. They supply oxygen for the air we breathe, remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and provide habitat for all life. We place incredible demands on our forests, and are clearly seeing how these demands are taking a toll.
Individuals and organizations are addressing deforestation by advocating stronger forest protection policies and laws, recycling, using wood and paper more efficiently, and choosing certified products.
Forest certification is granted to those forestry operations that use environmentally and socially responsible practices. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) are two well-known forest certification programs in the U.S.
Debate has increased in recent years concerning the credibility of these forest certification programs. What is the difference between FSC and SFI? Which one is more reputable? Are there other certification programs? How do they compare?
The Better Paper Project dug through fact sheets, articles, press releases, and reports to find the answers to these questions.
Below, we present a concise summary of why we consider the FSC to be the most credible forest certification program. We address the essential certification elements such strong environmental, social and community protection standards, and a strong certification and accreditation process. We explain the difference between the 5 FSC-certified papers and where publishers can find paper and corporations that are FSC-certified.
FSC and SFI Overview
The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) was created in 1993 to initiate dialog about the practice of sustainable forestry management. The FSC sets forth criteria, principles and standards that address social, economic and environmental issues. Its standards represent the strongest system for guiding sustainable forestry management. Today the FSC is considered the threshold for credible certification by environmental groups. Nearly 125 million acres of forest are FSC-certified in 76 countries, with 13.6 million of those acres in the U.S.
The Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) was launched in 1994 by the timber industry’s American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA) in response to the increasing demand for FSC products. Approximately 150 million acres of North American forests are currently managed by SFI, making it one of the world’s largest forestry management programs. From 2000 to 2002, the SFI certified 50 million acres of near status quo industrial practices--almost the entire U.S. industrial timber base, in addition to millions of acres of old growth logging in Canada. This is about as many acres as the FSC had certified in 54 countries in 9 years.
Why FSC is the Forest Certification Program
A number of organizations have researched the two forest certification programs, including The Alliance for Credible Forest Certification, The Meridian Institute, Forests & European Union Research Network (FERN), World Wildlife Fund (WWF), and American Lands Alliance. They have concluded that the SFI lacks essential credible certification elements that are currently only met with the FSC. These guidelines include:
* Strong forest and environmental protection standards
o Requires protection of old growth and endangered forests
o Establishes limits on large-scale clear cutting
o Encourages forestry practices that reduce toxic chemical use
* Strong community protection standards
o Consistently protects native peoples rights
o Requires workers to be paid competitive wages
o Requires compliance verification with social and international polices and laws
* Transparency and stakeholder participation required
o Peer review for all certification decisions
* Consistent link between product labels/claims and certified forests
o To carry labels, all non-recycled product lines must contain wood from certified forests
o Label claims should be correctly proportional to the amount of certified content in product line
o Excluded from the product lines: wood from illegal logging, plantation conversion, human rights violations, non-certified high conservation valued forests
* Fully independent and not influenced by the timber industry
o System is governed by an equal balance of economic, social, environmental interests
o Prohibits companies from modifying the certification standards during assessments
o System predominately funded by independent sources
SFI Improvements
The SFI has made improvements in recent years in response to public criticism. In their January 2005 update, the SFI recognizes the need to protect water quality from the harmful chemicals produced in wood harvesting. They have also agreed to limit the use of exotic species and have improved their certification process. Despite these necessary steps, they remain a weaker program because they still lack, or insufficiently address, the essential credible certification standards such as the ones outlined above.
What about the PEFC?
The Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification schemes (PEFC) is an independent non-profit organization founded in 1999 to promote forest sustainability through independent third party certification. Like the SFI, the PEFC lacks crucial elements of a credible forest certification system. European organizations such as WWF International, FERN, Greenpeace, and the Finnish Nature League have found that the PEFC does not protect native people’s rights (can vary from country to country) and are unable to guarantee well-managed forests.
Other Certification Schemes
In addition to the FSC, SFI, and PEFC, there many other certification programs including the Australian Forestry Standard (AFS), Canadian Standard’s Association (CSA), Malaysian Timber Certification Council (MTCC), and Certificación Forestal (Certflor). The Footprints in the Forest Report conducted by FERN provides assessments of these inferior certification schemes (pgs 19-28 of the PDF).
FSC-Certified Papers: Not Created Equal
It is important to understand that just because a paper is labeled FSC, it does not mean it is the environmentally preferable option. FSC paper standards allow for 5 different paper combinations the FSC will certify and label, providing elbow room to forestry corporations harvesting and selling pulp and paper. Some of them are better than others, with a couple that are inadequate and undermine our sustainability goals. The FSC paper label has created confusion in some minds about the definition and quality of environmentally responsible papers.
As mentioned, there are 5 different FSC-certified papers, which are listed in order of environmental preferability:
* FSC recycled (made with 100% post-consumer fiber)
* FSC mixed sources. There are three paper types:
o FSC-certified virgin and recycled fiber
o FSC-virgin, recycled, and controlled sources—contains fiber (NOT FSC-certified) from “unacceptable sources” such as wood from genetically modified trees or wood that has been illegally harvested
o FSC virgin and controlled sources
* FSC 100% virgin paper
Obviously the best FSC paper is the FSC recycled label paper that contains 100% post consumer fiber, which is also Ancient Forest Friendly. Another excellent paper choice is the FSC recycled/pure virgin mix. The virgin fiber is FSC-certified and there are no controlled sources in the paper. This paper is also considered Ancient Forest Friendly, but there are currently no papers available in North America that meet this FSC label definition.
FSC mixed label papers are a step in the right direction over conventional sheets, but improvements can still be made. If you are currently buying an FSC mixed paper, work with your suppliers to increase the recycled content to its maximum content, and ensure all the fiber is a mix of recycled and FSC-virgin fiber with no controlled sources.
The FSC 100% virgin and FSC pure virgin/controlled mixed papers are made with 100% virgin tree fiber and contain zero recycled content. Buying paper with 100% virgin fiber, even if it is FSC-certified, only deals with improved logging methods and does not reduce the number of trees harvested to make the paper.
The overall goal to keep in mind is you want to minimize the number of trees and harmful chemicals used to generate paper. In order to do this:
1. Request the maximum post-consumer recycled content available
2. Use pre-consumer and non-wood agricultural residues
3. Give preference to cleaner production processes, such as Processed Chlorine Free (PCF) and Totally Chlorine Free (TCF)
4. Use FSC-certified virgin fiber
FSC-certified fiber is virgin fiber that has been harvested sustainably and not taken from old growth and/or endangered forests. Ideally publications want to strive to use paper without any virgin fiber, but if this cannot be achieved then paper that contains virgin fiber should be bought only if it is certified through the FSC.
The Environmental Paper Network (EPN) is a diverse group of environmental organizations joined together to support socially and environmentally sustainable transformations within the pulp and paper industry. The Network has developed a Common Vision as a framework to guide the necessary shifts in pulp and paper production and consumption, and is an excellent resource for publishers to learn how they can play a role in the process of creating a more sustainable magazine industry.
Contacts for FSC-Certified Products and Corporations
The FSC provides contact information on their website for finding certified paper and locating paper merchants, paper manufacturers, printers, and pulp suppliers in the U.S. with the FSC chain-of-custody certification.
Conclusion
Those interested in reducing their environmental footprint should work with corporations that offer FSC certified products (and that are, of course, FSC-certified themselves). Publishers should encourage their suppliers to apply for FSC-certification if they have not already done so. A preference for FSC is the fastest and most efficient way to improve forestry management practices, as well as providing the necessary push needed to encourage other certification programs to adopt standards as high as theirs.
Below are a few reports and documents for those interested in researching forest certification further.
www.DontBuySFI.com: A wealth of information sponsored by the Alliance for Credible Forest Certification comparing FSC and SFI, along with PEFC. Fact sheets, testimonials, press releases, news articles, reports on this issue abound. A few highlights:
Comparative Analysis of the FSC and SFI Certification Programs. Exe..., Meridan Institute, October, 2001.
Similarities and Differences: FSC and SFI. Presentation from the Forest Leadership Forum, National Wildlife Federation, April, 2002.
Forest Certification: Sustainable Forestry or Misleading Marketing? igreenbuild.com, March, 2005.
Forest Certification Programs: A Comparison of the FSC and SFI of t.... Natural Resources Defense Council, April 2002
Why FSC and Not PEFC? Forest Ethics, January 2006.
Forestry and Wood Certification. WWF Newsletter, August, 2005.
Certification Assessments on Public & University Lands. The Pinchot Institute for Conservation, June 2002.
Natural forests are essential to life on earth. They supply oxygen for the air we breathe, remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and provide habitat for all life. We place incredible demands on our forests, and are clearly seeing how these demands are taking a toll.
Individuals and organizations are addressing deforestation by advocating stronger forest protection policies and laws, recycling, using wood and paper more efficiently, and choosing certified products.
Forest certification is granted to those forestry operations that use environmentally and socially responsible practices. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) are two well-known forest certification programs in the U.S.
Debate has increased in recent years concerning the credibility of these forest certification programs. What is the difference between FSC and SFI? Which one is more reputable? Are there other certification programs? How do they compare?
The Better Paper Project dug through fact sheets, articles, press releases, and reports to find the answers to these questions.
Below, we present a concise summary of why we consider the FSC to be the most credible forest certification program. We address the essential certification elements such strong environmental, social and community protection standards, and a strong certification and accreditation process. We explain the difference between the 5 FSC-certified papers and where publishers can find paper and corporations that are FSC-certified.
FSC and SFI Overview
The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) was created in 1993 to initiate dialog about the practice of sustainable forestry management. The FSC sets forth criteria, principles and standards that address social, economic and environmental issues. Its standards represent the strongest system for guiding sustainable forestry management. Today the FSC is considered the threshold for credible certification by environmental groups. Nearly 125 million acres of forest are FSC-certified in 76 countries, with 13.6 million of those acres in the U.S.The Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) was launched in 1994 by the timber industry’s American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA) in response to the increasing demand for FSC products. Approximately 150 million acres of North American forests are currently managed by SFI, making it one of the world’s largest forestry management programs. From 2000 to 2002, the SFI certified 50 million acres of near status quo industrial practices--almost the entire U.S. industrial timber base, in addition to millions of acres of old growth logging in Canada. This is about as many acres as the FSC had certified in 54 countries in 9 years.Why FSC is the Forest Certification Program
A number of organizations have researched the two forest certification programs, including The Alliance for Credible Forest Certification, The Meridian Institute, Forests & European Union Research Network (FERN), World Wildlife Fund (WWF), and American Lands Alliance. They have concluded that the SFI lacks essential credible certification elements that are currently only met with the FSC. These guidelines include:
* Strong forest and environmental protection standards
o Requires protection of old growth and endangered forests
o Establishes limits on large-scale clear cutting
o Encourages forestry practices that reduce toxic chemical use
* Strong community protection standards
o Consistently protects native peoples rights
o Requires workers to be paid competitive wages
o Requires compliance verification with social and international polices and laws
* Transparency and stakeholder participation required
o Peer review for all certification decisions
* Consistent link between product labels/claims and certified forests
o To carry labels, all non-recycled product lines must contain wood from certified forests
o Label claims should be correctly proportional to the amount of certified content in product line
o Excluded from the product lines: wood from illegal logging, plantation conversion, human rights violations, non-certified high conservation valued forests
* Fully independent and not influenced by the timber industry
o System is governed by an equal balance of economic, social, environmental interests
o Prohibits companies from modifying the certification standards during assessments
o System predominately funded by independent sources
SFI Improvements
The SFI has made improvements in recent years in response to public criticism. In their January 2005 update, the SFI recognizes the need to protect water quality from the harmful chemicals produced in wood harvesting. They have also agreed to limit the use of exotic species and have improved their certification process. Despite these necessary steps, they remain a weaker program because they still lack, or insufficiently address, the essential credible certification standards such as the ones outlined above.
What about the PEFC?
The Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification schemes (PEFC) is an independent non-profit organization founded in 1999 to promote forest sustainability through independent third party certification. Like the SFI, the PEFC lacks crucial elements of a credible forest certification system. European organizations such as WWF International, FERN, Greenpeace, and the Finnish Nature League have found that the PEFC does not protect native people’s rights (can vary from country to country) and are unable to guarantee well-managed forests.Other Certification Schemes
In addition to the FSC, SFI, and PEFC, there many other certification programs including the Australian Forestry Standard (AFS), Canadian Standard’s Association (CSA), Malaysian Timber Certification Council (MTCC), and Certificación Forestal (Certflor). The Footprints in the Forest Report conducted by FERN provides assessments of these inferior certification schemes (pgs 19-28 of the PDF).
FSC-Certified Papers: Not Created Equal
It is important to understand that just because a paper is labeled FSC, it does not mean it is the environmentally preferable option. FSC paper standards allow for 5 different paper combinations the FSC will certify and label, providing elbow room to forestry corporations harvesting and selling pulp and paper. Some of them are better than others, with a couple that are inadequate and undermine our sustainability goals. The FSC paper label has created confusion in some minds about the definition and quality of environmentally responsible papers.
As mentioned, there are 5 different FSC-certified papers, which are listed in order of environmental preferability:
* FSC recycled (made with 100% post-consumer fiber)
* FSC mixed sources. There are three paper types:
o FSC-certified virgin and recycled fiber
o FSC-virgin, recycled, and controlled sources—contains fiber (NOT FSC-certified) from “unacceptable sources” such as wood from genetically modified trees or wood that has been illegally harvested
o FSC virgin and controlled sources
* FSC 100% virgin paper
Obviously the best FSC paper is the FSC recycled label paper that contains 100% post consumer fiber, which is also Ancient Forest Friendly. Another excellent paper choice is the FSC recycled/pure virgin mix. The virgin fiber is FSC-certified and there are no controlled sources in the paper. This paper is also considered Ancient Forest Friendly, but there are currently no papers available in North America that meet this FSC label definition.
FSC mixed label papers are a step in the right direction over conventional sheets, but improvements can still be made. If you are currently buying an FSC mixed paper, work with your suppliers to increase the recycled content to its maximum content, and ensure all the fiber is a mix of recycled and FSC-virgin fiber with no controlled sources.
The FSC 100% virgin and FSC pure virgin/controlled mixed papers are made with 100% virgin tree fiber and contain zero recycled content. Buying paper with 100% virgin fiber, even if it is FSC-certified, only deals with improved logging methods and does not reduce the number of trees harvested to make the paper.
The overall goal to keep in mind is you want to minimize the number of trees and harmful chemicals used to generate paper. In order to do this:
1. Request the maximum post-consumer recycled content available
2. Use pre-consumer and non-wood agricultural residues
3. Give preference to cleaner production processes, such as Processed Chlorine Free (PCF) and Totally Chlorine Free (TCF)
4. Use FSC-certified virgin fiber
FSC-certified fiber is virgin fiber that has been harvested sustainably and not taken from old growth and/or endangered forests. Ideally publications want to strive to use paper without any virgin fiber, but if this cannot be achieved then paper that contains virgin fiber should be bought only if it is certified through the FSC.
The Environmental Paper Network (EPN) is a diverse group of environmental organizations joined together to support socially and environmentally sustainable transformations within the pulp and paper industry. The Network has developed a Common Vision as a framework to guide the necessary shifts in pulp and paper production and consumption, and is an excellent resource for publishers to learn how they can play a role in the process of creating a more sustainable magazine industry.
Contacts for FSC-Certified Products and Corporations
The FSC provides contact information on their website for finding certified paper and locating paper merchants, paper manufacturers, printers, and pulp suppliers in the U.S. with the FSC chain-of-custody certification.
Conclusion
Those interested in reducing their environmental footprint should work with corporations that offer FSC certified products (and that are, of course, FSC-certified themselves). Publishers should encourage their suppliers to apply for FSC-certification if they have not already done so. A preference for FSC is the fastest and most efficient way to improve forestry management practices, as well as providing the necessary push needed to encourage other certification programs to adopt standards as high as theirs.
Below are a few reports and documents for those interested in researching forest certification further.
www.DontBuySFI.com: A wealth of information sponsored by the Alliance for Credible Forest Certification comparing FSC and SFI, along with PEFC. Fact sheets, testimonials, press releases, news articles, reports on this issue abound. A few highlights:
Comparative Analysis of the FSC and SFI Certification Programs. Exe..., Meridan Institute, October, 2001.
Similarities and Differences: FSC and SFI. Presentation from the Forest Leadership Forum, National Wildlife Federation, April, 2002.
Forest Certification: Sustainable Forestry or Misleading Marketing? igreenbuild.com, March, 2005.
Forest Certification Programs: A Comparison of the FSC and SFI of t.... Natural Resources Defense Council, April 2002
Why FSC and Not PEFC? Forest Ethics, January 2006.
Forestry and Wood Certification. WWF Newsletter, August, 2005.
Certification Assessments on Public & University Lands. The Pinchot Institute for Conservation, June 2002.
Comment
© 2012 Created by Technology Team.
You need to be a member of Better Paper Project to add comments!
Join Better Paper Project