Legal vs. certified timber: Preliminary impacts of forest certification in Cameroon
The concept of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) has a pivotal role for both the Cameroonian legal framework and market-based instruments such as forest certification. We assess the different impacts on timber harvesting of the forest legal framework as compared to the adoption of forest certification, on the ten Forest Management Unit (FMUs) that had received a Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification by mid-2009, and discuss some differences between legal and certified timber. Results show that the average reduction in the annual allowable cut (AAC) of concerned FMUs is about 11% when legal harvesting rules are adopted, about 18% when the FSC rules as requested by the certifying bodies (CBs) are applied, and about 34% when the 'FSC logic of sustainable harvesting', as agreed upon on paper by logging companies and CBs, is used. Our findings confirm that forest certification has the potential to improve weak normative frameworks that allow the unsustainable use of forests. However, they also suggest that certifying bodies tend to reduce the stringency of the FSC rules in certified FMUs if not backed by a uniform FSC standard and by a stronger legal framework. We elaborate on the reasons why that may occur and provide suggestions for improvements.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Kiker, Clyde F. & Putz, Francis E., 1997. "Ecolocical certification of forest products: Economic challenges," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 37-51, January.
- van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Nelson, Harry W. & Vertinsky, Ilan, 2005. "Certification of sustainable forest management practices: a global perspective on why countries certify," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(6), pages 857-867, November.
- Ralph Espach, 2006. "When is Sustainable Forestry Sustainable? The Forest Stewardship Council in Argentina and Brazil," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 6(2), pages 55-84, 05.
- Cashore, Benjamin & van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Vertinsky, Ilan & Auld, Graeme & Affolderbach, Julia, 2005. "Private or self-regulation? A comparative study of forest certification choices in Canada, the United States and Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 53-69, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:13:y:2011:i:3:p:184-190. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.