[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-500791-105":59,"doc-detail-500791-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","certification-robustness-book-chain-project-forest-sourcing-workstream","Certification robustness - Book Chain Project: Forest Sourcing workstream","","Certification robustness evaluates how resilient the FSC and PEFC forest certification systems are across ten countries using country-specific forest risk profiles and publicly available sources up to 31 March 2021. It maps FSC and PEFC requirements against risk profiles, identifies key gaps, and discusses concerns raised by NGOs about weak implementation, limited traceability, transparency deficits, audit snapshots, and conflicts of interest. It concludes that certification alone does not solve deforestation and supports risk-based publisher sourcing policies.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/certification-robustness-book-chain-project-forest-sourcing-workstream/500791/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/certification-robustness-book-chain-project-forest-sourcing-workstream/500791.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Franzy","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-20","2026-10-03",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":34},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"Which certification systems are evaluated in the document, and what is the main purpose of the assessment?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The document critically evaluates the robustness of the FSC and PEFC forest certification systems. Its purpose is to assess how well these schemes hold up against country-specific forest risk profiles and to identify key gaps.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How does the document build the country risk overview for each of the ten countries?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"It builds country-specific forest risk overviews using reputable sources such as Chatham House, Preferred by Nature (formerly NEPCon), and Earthsight, based on the Book Chain Project Country Forest Risk Tool and additional selection criteria.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What concerns do NGOs raise about certification robustness?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"NGOs claim standards may vary by country, there is no truly unbroken traceability system, transparency about ownership is lacking, scheduled audits are only snapshots, and there can be conflicts of interest when certifiers are paid by companies seeking certification.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},500791,1791150548,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":34,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},2336478945519,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_085a072bc5b1113ac321206ff7593b45","Book Chain Project V2  \n01.07.2021  \nCertification robustness  \nBook Chain Project: Forest Sourcing workstream  \nExecutive summary  \nForest certification is widely recognised as the strongest tool available to ensure products are sourced from responsibly managed forests. At the same time, no system is waterproof, and we have been closely following recent investigative reportson the robustness of certification in certain countries.  \nThis document critically evaluates the robustness of the two main forest certification systems – the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC)– in ten countries. We started by building up an overview of country-specific forest risks for each country based on reputable sources such as Chatham House, Preferred by Nature (formerly NEPCon) and Earthsight. We then assessed the applicable FSC and PEFC standards against the country risk profile, highlighting key gaps. All information publicly available as of 31 March 2021 was considered.  \nThe countries were selected based on the following criteria:  \n• Forest risk on the Book Chain Project (BCP) Country Forest Risk Tool (2020);  \n• Transparency Corruption Perceptions Index score of >5 (indicating mid-high levels of corruption);  \n• Top 10 countries in terms of publisher picks on the BCP system and/or volume bought based on volumes research conducted in 2019.  \nCertification schemes and environmental NGOs agree that forest certification , on its own, is not designed to solve deforestation. Additional robustness measures may be required. We recommend that Publishers use this document to understand the level of certification robustness in priority countries, as a basis for setting their sourcing policies based on their risk appetite.  \nConcerns from the NGO community around certification robustness  \nRecent Greenpeace and Earthsight reports make the following claims regarding certification robustness:  \n• Standards may change depending on the country and region. This adaptability can either strengthen them when locally adapted; or weaken them whenever they depart considerably from the global principles and criteria.  \n• No Forest and Ecosystem Risk Commodity (FERC) certification system currently contains a truly unbroken traceability system, tracking commodities from source to end product; and there is a lack of transparency around the ultimate ownership of certified companies.  \n• Scheduled audits only represent a snapshot of conditions , and there is a risk of a conflict of interest where certifiers are paid by the companies seeking certification.  \n• The interpretation, implementation and enforcement of certification standards often falls short.  \nTo quote the Greenpeace report in summary: “[w]hile some certification schemes have strong standards, weak implementation combined with a lack of transparency and product traceability means even these schemes have major failings.”  \nContents  \nExecutive summary 1  \nFSC and PEFC 3  \nCertification Robustness: Summary 5  \nCertification Robustness: By Country 10  \nImage credit: Ulet Ifansasti / Greenpeace  \nFSC and PEFC  \nFSC and PEFC are the two internationally recognised systems for the certification of responsible forest management and its supply chain. They are both official indicators of progress towards Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 15 , Life on Land. According to the UN Food & Agricultural Organization (FAO), around 425 million hectares of forest worldwide are certified under either (or both) scheme(s) .  \nFSC works top-down, through an international standard which is interpreted at national level. PEFC works bottom-up, through mutual recognition and endorsement of national standards which adhere to international criteria.  \nFSC  \nFSC was set up by a group of businesses, environmentalists and community leaders in 1994 to provide a system for voluntary accreditation and independent third-party certification of forests. As of February 2021, over ","cbCaimbpvij5HWjA","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaimbpvij5HWjA","pdf",617329,32,"English","# Executive summary\n# FSC and PEFC\n## FSC\n## The 10 FSC Principles & Criteria\n# Certification Robustness: Summary\n# Certification Robustness: By Country","[{\"question\":\"Which certification systems are evaluated in the document, and what is the main purpose of the assessment?\",\"answer\":\"The document critically evaluates the robustness of the FSC and PEFC forest certification systems. Its purpose is to assess how well these schemes hold up against country-specific forest risk profiles and to identify key gaps.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the document build the country risk overview for each of the ten countries?\",\"answer\":\"It builds country-specific forest risk overviews using reputable sources such as Chatham House, Preferred by Nature (formerly NEPCon), and Earthsight, based on the Book Chain Project Country Forest Risk Tool and additional selection criteria.\"},{\"question\":\"What concerns do NGOs raise about certification robustness?\",\"answer\":\"NGOs claim standards may vary by country, there is no truly unbroken traceability system, transparency about ownership is lacking, scheduled audits are only snapshots, and there can be conflicts of interest when certifiers are paid by companies seeking certification.\"}]","Certification robustness - Book Chain Project: Forest Sourcing workstream | PDF",1791015118,81]