Forest certification and trust — Different roles in different environments

Trust is an integral element of a flourishing society. Trust can partly be created through trust-building institutions. This article scrutinizes the role played by forest certification in building trust at the local level of the forest sectors of Finland and Russia. The requirements for public participation of forest certification schemes are being used as a tool for analyzing the trust-building capacity of forest certification schemes. The need for “extra” trust is different in these countries. Hence, it is no surprise that forest certification plays different roles in trust-building in Finland and Russia. From the Russian experience we can learn that a non-state regulation can increase openness, participation and trust in a country of a low level of trust and very little participatory rights in environmental legislation. In Russia, trust-building can be a win–win situation, where participatory mechanisms can benefit all stakeholders at the local level. Yet, enhancing trust requires both procedural and substantive rights for local communities. In Finland participatory rights are in general well defined in environmental legislation. Forest legislation is, however, an exception, and forest certification has not been able to increase the amount of participation in forest management. The different trust-relationships are considered to be in conflict and especially the current interpretation of private ownership encumbers the local-level trust-building through participation and openness. It is therefore apparent that increasing openness would require wide public discussion and changes in Finnish forest legislation.