IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i10p1898-d115888.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Chain-of-Custody Certification in the Czech and Slovak Republic

Author

Listed:
  • Hubert Paluš

    (Department of Marketing, Trade and World Forestry, Faculty of Wood Sciences and Technology, Technical University in Zvolen, T. G. Masaryka 24, 960 53 Zvolen, Slovakia)

  • Ján Parobek

    (Department of Marketing, Trade and World Forestry, Faculty of Wood Sciences and Technology, Technical University in Zvolen, T. G. Masaryka 24, 960 53 Zvolen, Slovakia)

  • Roman Dudík

    (Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences, Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Mikuláš Šupín

    (Department of Marketing, Trade and World Forestry, Faculty of Wood Sciences and Technology, Technical University in Zvolen, T. G. Masaryka 24, 960 53 Zvolen, Slovakia)

Abstract

Forest certification is a voluntary verification tool that has been gaining importance within the global sustainability issues as an independent verification tool for sustainable forest management and wood processing industry and as an influencer in private and public purchasing policies and a component of emerging wood harvesting and trade legality schemes. This study focuses on the chain-of-custody (CoC) component of forest certification. A survey of CoC certified companies in the Czech Republic and Slovakia was carried out to explore the understanding of the concept and role of forest and CoC certification as an environmental, economic, and social tool. It aimed to determine expectations following from the implementation of CoC certification by companies and to identify difficulties in existing certified wood product supply chains and costs related to purchase and sales of certified forest products, respectively. Results indicate that respondents demonstrated a high level of understanding of the CoC concept and that they link forest certification mainly to the issues of legality, tracing the origin source of supply and promotion of sustainable utilisation of wood. The main expected benefits are linked to the improvement of an external company image followed by penetration of new markets and increase of sales volume. CoC is not considered a tool to improve internal company performance and efficiency. The key problems connected to certified supply chains relate to the sufficient quantity of certified forest products, low margins and overpriced certified material inputs. Respondents reported none or minimum price premiums for their certified products over non-certified alternatives. Several differences related to the understanding of the sustainable forest management concept and the level of price premium paid for certified inputs were identified between the PEFC (Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification) and FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) certified companies as well as between the different forest products sectors.

Suggested Citation

  • Hubert Paluš & Ján Parobek & Roman Dudík & Mikuláš Šupín, 2017. "Assessment of Chain-of-Custody Certification in the Czech and Slovak Republic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-13, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:10:p:1898-:d:115888
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/10/1898/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/10/1898/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Lewis, Robin A. & Davis, Stacey R., 2015. "Forest certification, institutional capacity, and learning: An analysis of the impacts of the Malaysian Timber Certification Scheme," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 18-26.
    3. Cashore, Benjamin & Stone, Michael W., 2012. "Can legality verification rescue global forest governance?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 13-22.
    4. Owari, Toshiaki & Juslin, Heikki & Rummukainen, Arto & Yoshimura, Tetsuhiko, 2006. "Strategies, functions and benefits of forest certification in wood products marketing: Perspectives of Finnish suppliers," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 380-391, December.
    5. Siry, Jacek P. & Cubbage, Frederick W. & Ahmed, Miyan Rukunuddin, 2005. "Sustainable forest management: global trends and opportunities," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 551-561, May.
    6. Ahmet Tolunay & Türkay Türkoğlu, 2014. "Perspectives and Attitudes of Forest Products Industry Companies on the Chain of Custody Certification: A Case Study From Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-15, February.
    7. Ulybina, Olga & Fennell, Shailaja, 2013. "Forest certification in Russia: Challenges of institutional development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 178-187.
    8. Vidal, Natalia & Kozak, Robert & Cohen, David, 2005. "Chain of custody certification: an assessment of the North American solid wood sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 345-355, March.
    9. Anni Tuppura & Anne Toppinen & Kaisu Puumalainen, 2016. "Forest Certification and ISO 14001: Current State and Motivation in Forest Companies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(5), pages 355-368, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. So, Hau Wing & Lafortezza, Raffaele, 2022. "Reviewing the impacts of eco-labelling of forest products on different dimensions of sustainability in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    2. Hubert Paluš & Ján Parobek & Rastislav Šulek & Ján Lichý & Jaroslav Šálka, 2018. "Understanding Sustainable Forest Management Certification in Slovakia: Forest Owners’ Perception of Expectations, Benefits and Problems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    3. Zubizarreta, Mikel & Arana-Landín, Germán & Wolff, Sarah & Egiluz, Ziortza, 2023. "Assessing the economic impacts of forest certification in Spain: A longitudinal study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    4. Dacinia Crina Petrescu & Florina Bran & Carmen Valentina Radulescu & Ruxandra Malina Petrescu-Mag, 2020. "Green Procurement through Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Certification in the Private Sector. Perceptions and Willingness to Buy of Private Companies from Romania," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 22(53), pages 1-42, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hubert Paluš & Ján Parobek & Rastislav Šulek & Ján Lichý & Jaroslav Šálka, 2018. "Understanding Sustainable Forest Management Certification in Slovakia: Forest Owners’ Perception of Expectations, Benefits and Problems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    2. Zubizarreta, Mikel & Arana-Landín, Germán & Wolff, Sarah & Egiluz, Ziortza, 2023. "Assessing the economic impacts of forest certification in Spain: A longitudinal study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    3. Brusselaers, Jan & Verbeke, Wim & Mettepenningen, Evy & Buysse, Jeroen, 2020. "Unravelling the true drivers for eco-certified wood consumption by introducing scarcity," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    4. Piketty, Marie-Gabrielle & Garcia Drigo, Isabel, 2018. "Shaping the implementation of the FSC standard: the case of auditors in Brazil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 160-166.
    5. Blackman, Allen & Rivera, Jorge, 2010. "The Evidence Base for Environmental and Socioeconomic Impacts of “Sustainable” Certification," RFF Working Paper Series dp-10-17, Resources for the Future.
    6. Tricallotis, Marcos & Gunningham, Neil & Kanowski, Peter, 2018. "The impacts of forest certification for Chilean forestry businesses," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 82-91.
    7. Ahmet Tolunay & Türkay Türkoğlu, 2014. "Perspectives and Attitudes of Forest Products Industry Companies on the Chain of Custody Certification: A Case Study From Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-15, February.
    8. Hermudananto, & Romero, Claudia & Ruslandi, & Putz, Francis E., 2018. "Analysis of corrective action requests from Forest Stewardship Council audits of natural forest management in Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 28-37.
    9. Guillaume Lescuyer & Raphaël Tsanga & Samir Nziengui & Eric Forni & Claudia Romero, 2021. "Influence of FSC certification on the governance of the logging sector in the Congo basin," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 45(3), pages 289-304, August.
    10. Blackman, Allen & Rivera, Jorge, 2010. "The Evidence Base for Environmental and Socioeconomic Impacts of “Sustainable†Certification," RFF Working Paper Series dp-10-10-efd, Resources for the Future.
    11. Lippert, Christian, 2009. "Fraud and free riding in tropical forests – on the potential for certification to enforce sustainable resource use indirectly," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 58(03), pages 1-11, April.
    12. Arts, Bas, 2014. "Assessing forest governance from a ‘Triple G’ perspective: Government, governance, governmentality⁎⁎This article belongs to the Special Issue: Assessing Forest Governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 17-22.
    13. Krott, Max & Bader, Axel & Schusser, Carsten & Devkota, Rosan & Maryudi, Ahmad & Giessen, Lukas & Aurenhammer, Helene, 2014. "Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 34-42.
    14. Alba Rocio Gutierrez Garzon & Pete Bettinger & Jacek Siry & Bin Mei & Jesse Abrams, 2019. "The Terms Foresters and Planners in the United States Use to Infer Sustainability in Forest Management Plans: A Survey Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.
    15. Fatima Khalid & Asma Jamil & Huda Kamal & Tahira Afzal & Tahseenullah Khan & Muhammad Babar Taj & Ahmad Raheel & Syed Ahmad Tirmizi & Muhammad Babar Taj & Muhammad Jamshed Iqbal & Muhammad Ashiq & Muh, 2019. "Multiple Impacts of Illegal Logging- A key to Deforestation Over the Globe," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 20(5), pages 15430-15435, August.
    16. Jakub Michal & David Březina & Dalibor Šafařík & Václav Kupčák & Andrea Sujová & Jitka Fialová, 2019. "Analysis of Socioeconomic Impacts of the FSC and PEFC Certification Systems on Business Entities and Consumers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-17, July.
    17. Nathan, Iben & Chen, Jie & Hansen, Christian Pilegaard & Xu, Bin & Li, Yan, 2018. "Facing the complexities of the global timber trade regime: How do Chinese wood enterprises respond to international legality verification requirements, and what are the implications for regime effecti," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 169-180.
    18. Hasyim, Zainuri & Laraswati, Dwi & Purwanto, Ris H. & Pratama, Andita A. & Maryudi, Ahmad, 2020. "Challenges facing independent monitoring networks in the Indonesian timber legality assurance system," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    19. Thomas J. Straka & Patricia A. Layton, 2010. "Response to Comments of Ben Gunneberg," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(8), pages 1-5, August.
    20. So, Hau Wing & Lafortezza, Raffaele, 2022. "Reviewing the impacts of eco-labelling of forest products on different dimensions of sustainability in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:10:p:1898-:d:115888. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.