Stakeholder seminar

Revision of PEFC requirements

Part 1: standard setting

Geneva, Switzerland (1st June 2010)

1

Objectives of the stakeholders dialogue

2

- To inform stakeholders about the results of work of the revision Working Group.

- To receive feedback from stakeholders on the “enquiry draft” documents.

- To encourage stakeholders in participation in the formal public consultation.

Global Challenges for Certification

PEFC Stakeholder DialogueGeneva 1st June 2010

Ben Gunneberg

PEFC Council Secretary General

3

Over last ten years:

Increasing public and consumer awareness and knowledge Increasing involvement by governments at all levels Concept of “corporate social responsibility" adopted – and implemented –

by more and more companies Forest management has become a global procurement issue

The rise of issues such as climate change, social issues, biodiversity – and the potential contribution by forests especially in the tropics

Forest certification is now a solution provider

However….

4

Challenge 1: Expansion of Certification

Only 8% of the world’s forests are certified – have we stalled? Only 26% of the world’s industrial roundwood supply is certified – after

almost 20 years of forest certification 66% of the total area certified to PEFC

8% 26%

66%

5

Challenge 2: Distribution of certification

6

52.8

38.3

5.22.8 2.5 0.9 0.8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Western Europe

North America

Oceania CIS Latin America Africa Asia

% o

f to

tal f

ore

st a

rea

180 million ha, 56% of world’s certified forests

82 million ha, 26% of world’s certified forests

CIS = Commonwealth of independent states

Source: UNECE/FAO Forest Products Annual Market Review 2008-2009

Legislation and procurement policies as drivers for sustainable and legal timber stimulate demand for certified product and are welcomed:

Legislation (Lacey Act, Due Diligence Proposal EU) Bilateral Agreements – FLEGT; MoU China & Indonesia, etc Public Procurement Policies (CPET, TPAC, ICLEI, EU Ecoflower etc) Green Buildings initiatives Responsible Purchasing Policies & Codes of Conduct

Need to ensure they remain drivers and do not become barriers

7

Challenge 3: Securing Market Access

PEFC Standards Revision needs to ensure that: Meta standard requirements are flexible enough to be applicable

to all national processes,

Resulting national certification requirements are feasible, realistic and cost-effective.

Both the Meta standard requirements and resulting national certification standards and systems are robust enough to provide confidence to deliver key market and stakeholder expectations

Finding the right balance is the challenge

8

Context of the PEFC Revision

Governance Review 2008 New Strategic Plan General Review of Statutes and Documents

chain of custody and requirements for C-o-C Certification Bodies requirements for standard setting, forest management standards and

regional/group certification, requirements for FM CBs and PEFC endorsement process.

9

PEFC ST 1001:20xx: Standard setting – requirements

-- establishes governance requirements for national standards processes

PEFC ST 1002:20xx: Group forest certification – requirements

-- rules for group or regional certification

PEFC ST 1003:20xx: Sustainable Forest Management Standards

-- requirements for national SFM standards

10

Elements under Review

Objectives

Incorporate latest knowledge Respond to customer/community expectations Respond to new challenges (global south) Broaden stakeholder involvement Streamline PEFC requirements and structures Simplify PEFC documentation

Stages of the revision process (PEFC GD 1003:2009)

Proposal stage: “Project” for development of new document or revision of existing is approved by the BoD

Preparatory st.: A working group is set up and first draft or analytical papers prepared by the project leader

WG stage: Working Group builds consensus on draft documents

Enquiry stage: A draft document is released for public consultation (2 months minimum), comments received are considered by the WG

Formal approval: Final draft is adopted by the PEFC General Assembly based on recommendation of the PEFC BoD.

12

Timetable of the revision process

Timetable

13

• Provides for balanced representation of stakeholders

• 5 meetings 2009-2010

• Established four (4) task forces (standard setting and group

certification; biodiversity; social issues; and plantation forestry and

GMOs)

• Organised two specialists workshop (social issues in Feb 2010

and biodiversity in March 2010),

• Prepared draft documents for public consultation

Working group stage

• Three documents published for public consultation

(mid April to the end of June 2010),

• Stakeholder Dialogues (Geneva in May 2010,

Malaysia in June 2010)

• Three webinars (1-3rd June 2010)

Public consultation stage

• WG will consider all comments from public consultation and will deliver to the PEFC BoD a final draft (September 2010),

• PEFC Board of Directors will consider the final draft and recommends it to PEFC General Assembly for formal voting or returns it back to the WG (October 2010),

• PEFC General Assembly will formally vote on the final drafts documents

Next stages

Participate in online consultation: www.pefc.org, click on Get involved - Public consultations

PEFC Standard Setting - Requirements

PEFC ST 1001:200X (ED 1.0)

17

Jaroslav Tymrak

PEFC Council Head of Technical Unit

Components of the Standard:

1. Standardising Body

2. Standard setting process

18

Scope: Compliance with this document is required for the development of national forest management and chain of custody standards.

Basic approach

1. The document is using a process approach – Example: defines requirements for the standard setting process

from its beginning “identification of need for standard setting/revision” to “publication of the standard”

2. The document is a metastandard– Requires the standard setting bodies to establish their own

procedures in compliance with this document.

19

Requirements for the Standardising Body:

To identify a body for building consensus (WG/committee) and a body for formal approval of standards;

To have written standard setting procedures, which are publicly available, subject to periodic review;

To keep records of the standard setting process;

To have a WG/committee, responsible for the standardisation work with balanced representation of stakeholders;

To have procedures for any substantive or procedural complaints.

20

Requirements for the Standard Setting Process:

To proactively identify stakeholders;

To identify “disadvantaged and key stakeholders” and address constraints for their participation;

To publically announce & extend invitations announcing start of process, opportunities to engage, etc;

Working Group functions in an open and transparent manner and builds consensus on content of standards;

Draft standards are send for public consultation;

Final standards shall be formally approved and published;

Standards shall be revised revised regularly.

21

Critical issues

1. Scope

Should the standard setting procedures apply to the development of forest management and C-o-C standards or the whole scheme?

2. Requirements for balanced representation of stakeholders

ED requires the WG/committee to be (i) accessible to stakeholders, (ii) balanced representation and decision making amongst interest categories, (iii) single interest shall not dominate nor be dominated, (iv) participation of materially affected persons shall be ensured.

22

Critical issues

3. How to incorporate “disadvantaged and key stakeholders”

ED requires the standardisation body to (i) identify interested & key stakeholders, (ii) address constraints and proactively seek their participation, (iii) direct invitation of those stakeholders to the process and public consultation.

4. Building consensus and decision making

ED uses the ISO definition of the consensus and requires the WG/committee to resolve “sustained oppositions to substantial issues by important part of the concerned interests”.

ED does not define a specific voting model as this is to be decided by stakeholders at the national level, and be compatible with the ISO definition.

23

Key differences from previous Standard:

Improved structure following the standard setting process,

More attention to:

(i) “disadvantaged and key stakeholders”;

(ii) ensuring balanced representation;

(iii) building consensus; and

(iv) transparency of the standard setting process .

(e.g. public standard setting procedures, invitations, standard setting report, complaints procedures, etc.)

24

Questions and answers

Participate in online consultation: www.pefc.org, click on Get involved - Public consultations