IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v70y2016icp91-98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forest Stewardship Council certification for forest ecosystem services: An analysis of stakeholder adaptability

Author

Listed:
  • Jaung, Wanggi
  • Putzel, Louis
  • Bull, Gary Q.
  • Kozak, Robert
  • Elliott, Chris

Abstract

There are many studies indicating the linkages of Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) forest management certification to forest ecosystem services (FES). The primary focus of the research was the FSC system's impacts on FES management. What is unique about this study is that it evaluates the adaptability of key FSC stakeholders in terms of their ability to incorporate FES. We surveyed 270 FSC stakeholders to quantify the capacity of FSC certification bodies (e.g., auditors) to audit FES delivery, the preferences of FSC enabling partners (e.g., FSC national networks) to provide training, and the experiences and expectations of FSC certificate holders (e.g., forest owners) to manage and sell FES. The study results indicate that the stakeholder adaptability was high for biodiversity conservation, carbon storage, and provision of non-timber forest products, medium for watershed protection services, and low for ecotourism and agricultural products. This may help FSC establish priorities for capacity development for FES.

Suggested Citation

  • Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Kozak, Robert & Elliott, Chris, 2016. "Forest Stewardship Council certification for forest ecosystem services: An analysis of stakeholder adaptability," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 91-98.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:70:y:2016:i:c:p:91-98
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2016.06.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934116301216
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.06.004?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meijaard, Erik & Wunder, Sven & Guariguata, Manuel R. & Sheil, Douglas, 2014. "What scope for certifying forest ecosystem services?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 160-166.
    2. Tikina, Anna & Kozak, Robert & Larson, Bruce, 2008. "What factors influence obtaining forest certification in the U.S. Pacific Northwest," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 240-247, February.
    3. Newsom, Deanna & Bahn, Volker & Cashore, Benjamin, 2006. "Does forest certification matter? An analysis of operation-level changes required during the SmartWood certification process in the United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 197-208, December.
    4. Pettenella, Davide & Brotto, Lucio, 2012. "Governance features for successful REDD+ projects organization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 46-52.
    5. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    6. van Dam, J. & Junginger, M. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2010. "From the global efforts on certification of bioenergy towards an integrated approach based on sustainable land use planning," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(9), pages 2445-2472, December.
    7. Kiker, Clyde F. & Putz, Francis E., 1997. "Ecolocical certification of forest products: Economic challenges," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 37-51, January.
    8. Tuominen, Matti & Rajala, Arto & Moller, Kristian, 2004. "How does adaptability drive firm innovativeness?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(5), pages 495-506, May.
    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. Savilaakso, Sini & Guariguata, Manuel R., 2017. "Challenges for developing Forest Stewardship Council certification for ecosystem services: How to enhance local adoption?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 55-66.
    2. Paluš, Hubert & Marcineková, Lenka & Šálka, Jaroslav, 2024. "Was stakeholder participation in the PEFC revision process successful in Slovakia?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    3. Wanggi Jaung & L. Roman Carrasco & Daniel R. Richards & Shaikh Fairul Edros Ahmad Shaikh & Puay Yok Tan, 2023. "The role of urban nature experiences in sustainable consumption: a transboundary urban ecosystem service," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 601-621, January.
    4. Kanehiro Kitayama & Shogoro Fujiki & Ryota Aoyagi & Nobuo Imai & John Sugau & Jupiri Titin & Reuben Nilus & Peter Lagan & Yoshimi Sawada & Robert Ong & Frederick Kugan & Sam Mannan, 2018. "Biodiversity Observation for Land and Ecosystem Health (BOLEH): A Robust Method to Evaluate the Management Impacts on the Bundle of Carbon and Biodiversity Ecosystem Services in Tropical Production Fo," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-15, November.
    5. Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Guariguata, Manuel R. & Sumaila, Ussif Rashid, 2016. "Estimating demand for certification of forest ecosystem services: A choice experiment with Forest Stewardship Council certificate holders," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 193-201.
    6. Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Kozak, Robert & Markum,, 2016. "Certification of forest watershed services: A Q methodology analysis of opportunities and challenges in Lombok, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 51-59.
    7. Morgan, Edward A. & Buckwell, Andrew & Guidi, Caterina & Garcia, Beatriz & Rimmer, Lawrence & Cadman, Tim & Mackey, Brendan, 2022. "Capturing multiple forest ecosystem services for just benefit sharing: The Basket of Benefits Approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    8. 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).

    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. Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Guariguata, Manuel R. & Sumaila, Ussif Rashid, 2016. "Estimating demand for certification of forest ecosystem services: A choice experiment with Forest Stewardship Council certificate holders," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 193-201.
    2. Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Kozak, Robert & Markum,, 2016. "Certification of forest watershed services: A Q methodology analysis of opportunities and challenges in Lombok, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 51-59.
    3. Baral, Himlal & Guariguata, Manuel R. & Keenan, Rodney J., 2016. "A proposed framework for assessing ecosystem goods and services from planted forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 260-268.
    4. Wells, Geoff & Fisher, Janet A. & Porras, Ina & Staddon, Sam & Ryan, Casey, 2017. "Rethinking Monitoring in Smallholder Carbon Payments for Ecosystem Service Schemes: Devolve Monitoring, Understand Accuracy and Identify Co-benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 115-127.
    5. Maczka, Krzysztof & Matczak, Piotr & Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Rechciński, Marcin & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Cent, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2016. "Application of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy—A systematic empirical analysis of national level policy documents in Poland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 169-176.
    6. 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.
    7. Merica Slišković & Katja Božić & Jelena Žanić Mikuličić & Ines Kolanović, 2024. "Addressing the Significance of the Union List with a Focus on Marine Invasive Alien Species Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-25, October.
    8. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Daniela D’Alessandro & Andrea Rebecchi & Letizia Appolloni & Andrea Brambilla & Silvio Brusaferro & Maddalena Buffoli & Maurizio Carta & Alessandra Casuccio & Liliana Coppola & Maria Vittoria Corazza , 2023. "Re-Thinking the Environment, Cities, and Living Spaces for Public Health Purposes, According with the COVID-19 Lesson: The LVII Erice Charter," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-17, September.
    10. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    11. Johann Audrain & Mateo Cordier & Sylvie Faucheux & Martin O’Connor, 2013. "Écologie territoriale et indicateurs pour un développement durable de la métropole parisienne," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Armand Colin, vol. 0(3), pages 523-559.
    12. Batidzirai, B. & Smeets, E.M.W. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2012. "Harmonising bioenergy resource potentials—Methodological lessons from review of state of the art bioenergy potential assessments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(9), pages 6598-6630.
    13. Wang, Shifeng & Wang, Sicong & Smith, Pete, 2015. "Quantifying impacts of onshore wind farms on ecosystem services at local and global scales," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1424-1428.
    14. Sedjo, Roger & Swallow, Stephen, 1999. "Eco-Labeling and the Price Premium," RFF Working Paper Series dp-00-04, Resources for the Future.
    15. 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.
    16. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    17. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    18. Beichen Ge & Congjin Wang & Yuhong Song, 2023. "Ecosystem Services Research in Rural Areas: A Systematic Review Based on Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    19. Newbold, Stephen C. & Johnston, Robert J., 2020. "Valuing non-market valuation studies using meta-analysis: A demonstration using estimates of willingness-to-pay for water quality improvements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    20. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.

    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:eee:forpol:v:70:y:2016:i:c:p:91-98. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.