IKEA supplier Swedwood in Karelia: TV documentary exposes impacts of FSC certified clear-cuts in HCV forests

article taken from http://www.fsc-watch.org/archives/2011/11/10/IKEA_supplier_Swedwo

Another news documentary causing embarrassment to the FSC appears in its home country, exposing the questionable practices of certified companies. ARD's Plus-minus programme travelled to Russian Karelia to inspect the forestry practices of IKEA subsidiary and timber supplier, Swedwood. What it found there was not pretty. As the documentary points out, Swedwood's large clear-cuts in 'old growth' forest appear to breach FSC's requirements concerning the treatment of High Conservation Value forest. The use of heavy machinery on vulnerable soils could have a lasting impact.

In response to the concerns raised in the piece, IKEA told Plus-minus that "we are taking these charges seriously and investigating them in-depth with the help of external FSC certifiers". FSC-Watch is not quite sure what that means, given that the FSC appears to have given up any pretence of carrying out proper investigations of alleged breaches of the Principles and Criteria or other failings by the certifiers - and instead is asking the certifiers to investigate themselves. It will come as no surprise to regular FSC-Watch readers to know that Swedwood's clear-cutting of old-growth forest was certified by the Rainforest Alliance SmartWood. A person identified in the documentary as the certifier responsible for the Swedwood certificate declines to be interviewed.

The full piece, with English sub-titles specially prepared for FSC-Watch by Pro-Regenwald is here:

FSC Certified is tools for Greenwashing

The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation claims that the number of violations of laws and standards accepted by the FSC makes its certification just a form of greenwashing. (wikipedia)

What Wikipedia says about FSC

FSC-Watch offers extensive and detail criticisms of FSC that can be reviewed on their website.^[27]

A number of well-known NGOs have canceled their support for FSC in recent times, most importantly Friends of the Earth UK^[28] or Robin Wood,^[29] as well as the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation^[30] and smaller groups such as ADEGA^[31] The FSC has been harshly criticized by its founding member Rainforest Foundation for being the "Enron of Forestry".^[32]

The Rainforest Foundation has suggested that the FSC does not properly control the accredited auditors (or certifiers), after investigating a number of certified forests in six countries. The FSC reviewed the certificates under question, and showed that some of the initial investigations were justified, so removed the license to certify from the Thai company Forest Industry Organisation.^[33] The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation claims that the number of violations of laws and standards accepted by the FSC makes its certification just a form of greenwashing.^[34]

The EcoEarth/Rainforest Portal has publicly questioned the FSC-endorsed policy of old-growth forest logging.^[35] They assert that research does not support the idea that this type of logging is carbon positive or sustainable and supplies research, though these views are disputed.

Critics are encouraged to file complaints and disputes against FSC in case of any differences. However, complainants must meet a number of conditions to be able to file complaints. For example, "only FSC members in good standing may file a dispute",^[36] and a deposit of a security of 1.000 USD^[37] is required. It is disputed whether the FSC takes effective action even in the case of some formal complaints.^[34]

FSC Certified is it worthed

This article taken from http://www.fsc-watch.org/archives/2011/10/20/Oxfam_report__22_500

With the title

Oxfam report: 22,500 people evicted to make way for FSC certified plantations in Uganda

On 22 September 2011, Oxfam released a report about a UK-based company called New Forests. Oxfam's researchers visited the company's plantations in Uganda and found that more than 22,000 people were kicked off the land to make way for the company's monocultures. Oxfam made public what FSC's certifying body, SGS, had somehow managed to ignore for the past two years. Accreditation Services International (ASI) in turn found out nothing about the evictions when it carried out an audit of SGS in 2010. New Forests Company has put out a statement explaining that it "takes Oxfam’s allegations extremely seriously and will conduct an immediate and thorough investigation".

FSC's response? Nothing. Zip. Nada. Zilch. There is no mention of the company on FSC's website. It is not listed on FSC's list of current disputes.

Here's a short video produced by The Guardian and below that an article from REDD-Monitorabout the certification. As mentioned in that article, the Oxfam report was widely reported. FSC's failure to respond publicly to this disgrace is inexplicable.