How important is FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) certification in the printing industry? Just go to WhatTheyThink.com and search on "FSC." A search this morning resulted in 141 references; the most recent on 10/29 and the earliest in March of 2005.
On 10/25, WTT posted an interview with Hemlock Printers reviewing their intitiatives to be more environmentally friendly, and one plank of their platform is the use of FSC Certified paper.
"This incidence of APP's certification is a serious one, and it is receiving much attention at FSC International and it's National Initiatives or affiliates. APP's certification has been rescinded, which demonstrates that the mechanism to deal with this kind of issue is in place, and it is working," said Dick Kowenhoven. "I personally believe that the accreditation of certifiers (Smartwood, SGS, KPMG etc.) will become an even tighter process. It has functioned well until recently, but now that many off-shore mills seek FSC certification, there are some new dynamics to consider."
As more and more printers, designers, buyers, and specifiers try to do the right thing by buying paper that comes from sustainably managed forests - or so they've been told - certification is becoming more and more important. After all, how does a printer in Texas, a buyer in Chicago, or a designer in New York actually know that the pulp used in making the paper for the project on which they are working doesn't come from sensitive rain forests or precious old growth timber?
On Tuesday, 10/30, the Wall Street Journal published investigation into the FSC labeling; FSC's 'Green' Label for Wood Products Gets Growing Pains. Authors Tom Wright and Jim Carlton start off saying:
The environmental group that runs a widely recognized labeling system to identify "green" wood and paper products has acknowledged that some companies using its label are destroying pristine forests and says it plans to overhaul its rules. The admission by the Forest Stewardship Council, based in Bonn, threatens the credibility of an organization whose tree-with-a-check-mark logo adorns products for sale at big retailers including Home Depot Inc., Lowe's Cos. and Ikea AB.
The article describes auditing procedures that involve auditors paid by the forsest products companies (can you say "fox" and "hen house?") and the practice of mixing pulp from certified sources with pulp from non-certified sources. Ricoh and Office Depot are two of the recognizable names who have canceled contracts with a provider whose certification has been withdrawn.
This is an issue that needs to be watched carefully - after all, it comes down to a matter of trust. And once that trust is lost, it's hard to regain.
Clearly some way to document sustainably produced forest products is important; the World Wildlife Fund released a statement supporting the FSC's response to an organization that is clearly not providing sustainable products:
The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is the premier international organization ensuring that forestry practices are environmentally, socially, and economically responsible. Its decision to rescind the rights of Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) to use the FSC logo shows that it is a robust and credible system that is committed to the responsible management of the world's forests.
Discussion
By Patrick Berger on Nov 02, 2007
When initiated in 1993-94 FSC was 100% on with vary few able to meet the requirements. Those certified, meeting the original requirements are truly FSC. As the rules were change so more could join the validity of the program was compromised resulting in a miss mash of what really is FSC.
By Paul Carney on Nov 02, 2007
FSC promotes sustainability. Governments certainly don't even attempt to do that. As a recently certified printer, we appreciate that there are organizations that take the preservation of our resources seriously. As the world marketplace recognizes we are dumping in our own mess kit, FSC and others will cause us to focus on slowing down the abuse and promoting the benefits of acting responsible to the environment. It is good for all of us to feel and feed the pressure to become sustainable.
By Paul Edwards on Nov 07, 2007
The more complex, expensive and rigid the requirements for compliance, the fewer organizations that will participate. Certification and 100% compliance is a lofty goal long term. Short term, I would rather see 80-90% of the possible companies participating at the 10-20% level as a start, than to see only 2-5% of the companies participating at 100% and the rst not participating at all.
Discussion
Join the discussion Sign In or Become a Member, doing so is simple and free