IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nature/v628y2024i8008d10.1038_s41586-024-07257-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

FSC-certified forest management benefits large mammals compared to non-FSC

Author

Listed:
  • Joeri A. Zwerts

    (Utrecht University
    Utrecht University)

  • E. H. M. Sterck

    (Utrecht University
    Biomedical Primate Research Centre)

  • Pita A. Verweij

    (Utrecht University)

  • Fiona Maisels

    (University of Stirling
    Global Conservation Program)

  • Jaap Waarde

    (WWF Cameroon)

  • Emma A. M. Geelen

    (Utrecht University)

  • Georges Belmond Tchoumba

    (WWF Cameroon)

  • Hermann Frankie Donfouet Zebaze

    (WWF Cameroon)

  • Marijke Kuijk

    (Utrecht University)

Abstract

More than a quarter of the world’s tropical forests are exploited for timber1. Logging impacts biodiversity in these ecosystems, primarily through the creation of forest roads that facilitate hunting for wildlife over extensive areas. Forest management certification schemes such as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) are expected to mitigate impacts on biodiversity, but so far very little is known about the effectiveness of FSC certification because of research design challenges, predominantly limited sample sizes2,3. Here we provide this evidence by using 1.3 million camera-trap photos of 55 mammal species in 14 logging concessions in western equatorial Africa. We observed higher mammal encounter rates in FSC-certified than in non-FSC logging concessions. The effect was most pronounced for species weighing more than 10 kg and for species of high conservation priority such as the critically endangered forest elephant and western lowland gorilla. Across the whole mammal community, non-FSC concessions contained proportionally more rodents and other small species than did FSC-certified concessions. The first priority for species protection should be to maintain unlogged forests with effective law enforcement, but for logged forests our findings provide convincing data that FSC-certified forest management is less damaging to the mammal community than is non-FSC forest management. This study provides strong evidence that FSC-certified forest management or equivalently stringent requirements and controlling mechanisms should become the norm for timber extraction to avoid half-empty forests dominated by rodents and other small species.

Suggested Citation

  • Joeri A. Zwerts & E. H. M. Sterck & Pita A. Verweij & Fiona Maisels & Jaap Waarde & Emma A. M. Geelen & Georges Belmond Tchoumba & Hermann Frankie Donfouet Zebaze & Marijke Kuijk, 2024. "FSC-certified forest management benefits large mammals compared to non-FSC," Nature, Nature, vol. 628(8008), pages 563-568, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:628:y:2024:i:8008:d:10.1038_s41586-024-07257-8
    DOI: 10.1038/s41586-024-07257-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07257-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41586-024-07257-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:nat:nature:v:628:y:2024:i:8008:d:10.1038_s41586-024-07257-8. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.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.