1. Where do the products come from?

Traceability is the ability to track sources of wood from final products through the supply chain to – as close as is practical – their origins. A clear sense of all the links in the products’ supply chain will be useful for the procurement manager to assess:

• Whether the sources of wood can be accurately identified.
• Whether the products have the properties they are claimed to have.
• For instance, whether:
• The wood was harvested and processed in compliance with relevant laws
• The wood comes from sustainably managed forests
• The unique ecological and cultural features of the forest where the wood was sourced have been maintained
• The products were manufactured with environmental controls in place
• Harvesting and manufacturing processes complied with social standards.

Tracing the origin of wood and paper-based products is not always straightforward. Supply chains can sometimes link many wood producers and dealers across several countries, and procurement portfolios can be complex, with multiple supply chains (Figures 2 and 3).

It may be easier to establish traceability for solid wood products than for paper-based products. Paper products are manufactured in pulp mills that typically draw wood from many sources. In the most complex cases, a network of dealers buying wood from many different loggers, landowners and sawmills may supply a pulp mill (Box 1). In a sawmill, logs usually lose their link to individual landowners in a sorting yard in the same way an agricultural business would combine grain from individual farmers in a common silo. The wood collected from sawmills – often chips that are by-products of solid-wood products manufacturing – further lose their individual identity during the paper making process.

Understanding the position of a company in the supply chain can help identify priorities and key areas of influence. Also, depending on the location and/or complexity of the supply chain, the need for due diligence is greater in some places than in others.

Requesting documentation from suppliers is a common method of tracing the origin of raw materials. A supply chain can be regarded as a chain of legally binding contractual relationships; purchasers can trace the supply chain through contracts, and require that their suppliers commit to providing raw materials that were harvested in compliance with the law, or meet other customer specifications. In places where the law – both background law and contract law – is strong and properly enforced, sales contracts can be a good compliance mechanism.
In addition to sales contracts, other documents for tracing the origin of raw materials include:

• Licensing permit(s) from the relevant authorities giving permission to harvest
• Certificate of a sustainable forest management standard
• Certificate of origin
• Chain-of-custody (CoC) certificate
• Certificate of legality
• Harvesting/management plans
• Phytosanitary certificates – issued by state/local authorities regarding the plant health requirements for the import of non-processed products
• Bill of lading – a receipt for cargo and contract of transportation between a shipper and a carrier that describes the goods being transported and is issued when the shipment is received in good order.
• Export documents
• Transportation certificates

All of these documents should carry appropriate stamps and seals from the relevant governmental agencies. However, false documentation can be common in certain countries and additional systems to trace the raw materials back to – within the limits of feasibility – their origins (Question 1) may be needed in some cases. Working with those directly involved in the supply chain will help develop a better understanding of the challenges, costs and other impacts associated with implementing additional tracking systems. Forest managers, forest owners, government agencies and certification bodies active in the area can provide useful information.

A high degree of vertical integration makes traceability simpler. However, in some countries such as in the United States, companies are becoming less integrated, selling off their forest lands and thereby externalizing traceability.

2. Is information about the products credible?

Knowing the context and conditions surrounding the harvesting of the raw materials and the manufacturing processes of the products is important. A knowledgeable buyer will be in a better position to properly assess the social and environmental claims of a product (e.g., wood was harvested under a Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) regime, etc.).

When information to support the claims of the product is not complete, accurate, or enough for the buyer to properly assess these claims, monitoring and verification are used to add credibility to the process. In some cases information may come from long and well-established business relationships. In other cases the buyer may wish to consult outside sources for additional information.

Monitoring and verification can take three forms:

1. Self verification – a producer monitors and reports about its own harvesting and manufacturing processes. Typical outputs include sustainability reports, emissions reports, reports on social indicators, resource usage reports, recycling reports, etc.
2. Second party verification – a buyer verifies that a supplier and/or the products of that supplier conform to a certain standard.
3. Third party verification – an independent party verifies that a supplier and/or its products conform to a certain standard. Independent, third-party verification is generally considered to provide more assurance.

Monitoring and verification systems tend to be designed differently depending on which part or aspect of the supply chain (production in the forest or manufacturing processes) they address:

Production in the forest – the classical monitoring system – forest authorities enforcing relevant laws – can be a reliable system where governance is strong, but it may not be adequate where governance is weak (Question 3. Concerned business, environmental groups and labor and trade organizations, generally agree that independent, third-party verification of forestry operations is desirable, particularly in areas of high risk (Box 2). Forest certification systems are intended to provide an alternative in this part of the supply chain.

Voluntary forest certification schemes have been developed to guide the marketplace. These systems allow interested producers to be independently assessed against a locally appropriate standard and to be recognized in the marketplace through a label that certifies compliance. The appropriateness of the standard includes having the right content for the right place, but also entails the process by which the standard was defined and implemented.

Forest certification

There are two major international systems for forest certification: the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Programme for the Endorsement of Certification Systems (PEFC). Both are used by community and family owned forests and large landowners and/or industrial operations. These systems have similarities, but they also have differences that are considered important by their respective constituencies. Environmental organizations tend to prefer the FSC, while landowners and tenure holders tend to prefer PEFC. The choice of systems varies by geography, and many forest companies are certified to both systems depending on the location of their operations.

Table 2 provides an overview of the general characteristics of these two systems.

Table 2 is NOT meant to be an exhaustive comparison. A proper comparison should include more detail of aspects such as compliance with international standards, system governance, accreditation, certification, criteria used as basis for the systems, performance on the ground, and others (Nussbaum and Simula, 2005). A list of comparisons can be found in Section III of this guide. Some of these comparisons represent the interests of specific stakeholder groups that claim there are significant differences between the certification systems.

Manufacturing processes – once raw materials leave the forests and reach mills and factories, they may no longer differ significantly from those of other industries if processing facilities are located in developed areas. However, when mills and factories are in less developed areas there may not be enough government enforcement of environmental and social standards. Self- and third-party verification systems can be useful to report and verify status and progress in relation to general standards and organizational commitments (e.g., to reduce emissions or increase recycled content).

Environmental Management Systems (EMS) and Social Management Systems (SMS) can be useful in the manufacturing process. An EMS is generally defined as a series of processes and practices seeking to assess and reduce the environmental impact of an organization, while an SMS encompasses the management of interactions between an organization and its social environment. In general, EMS and SMS have four major elements (EPE, 2007; SMS, 2007):

• Assessment and planning – identification of environmental and social aspects of interest, establishment of goals, targets, strategy and infrastructure for implementation.
• Implementation – execution of the plan, which may include investment in training and improved technology.
• Review – monitoring and evaluation of the implementation process, identification of issues.
• Adaptive management and verification – review of progress and adjustments for continual improvement. Different EMS/SMS have various degrees of third-party verification.

The presence or absence of viable EMS and SMS programs can be useful in assessing a supplier’s efforts to improve environmental and social performance and enhance compliance with pre-determined standards (EPE, 2007). Third-party verification systems, including chain-of-custody certification (Table 2) and some ecolabels (Box 3) can also be of help.

3. Have the products been legally produced?

There is no universally accepted definition of illegal logging and trade. Strictly speaking, illegality is anything that occurs in violation of the legal framework of a country. It is generally acknowledged that legality is not a synonym for Sustainable Forest Management, and that what is sustainable may not always be legal (World Bank, 2006; Contreras-Hermosilla et al., 2007). Some examples of what have been considered illegal forestry activities are given in Box 4.

Illegal logging is a fundamental problem in certain nations suffering from corruption or weak governance. International trade is one of the few sources of influence sufficient to create the political will to make improvements. Several international processes4 have taken up this issue, and national efforts have started to appear as a result. During the last five to 10 years, illegal logging and illegal trade have risen to the top of the international forestry agenda.

Illegal logging of wood and paper-based products entails a complex set of legal, political, social, and economic issues. Poverty, lack of education, financial issues, population growth, and weak governance are all enabling factors for illegal activity. Illegal activity has many drivers that make it challenging to address this issue. These drivers are often associated with a range of items from short-term economic gain to local and national actors including communities and governments:

• Local (and often national) governments may receive higher revenues as a result of illegal land conversion and increased timber production.
• Because illegally logged wood can be sold at lower prices, it depresses the profitability of legally harvested wood while improving the competitiveness of industries that use illegal wood.
• Many people may derive an income from illegal forest activities.

Illegal logging and illegal trade can create serious problems:

• Government revenue losses – the World Bank estimates that governments lose revenue equivalent to about US$ 5 billion per year (World Bank, 2002A).
• Unfair competition – market distortion and reduction of profitability for legal goods; the World Bank puts this cost at more than US$ 10 billion per year (World Bank, 2002A).
• Increased poverty – occurs indirectly when governments lose revenues.
• Support and funding of national and regional conflicts.
• Unplanned, uncontrolled and unsustainable forest management.
• Destruction – areas important for biological conservation, ecosystem services, and local livelihoods.

Between 8-10% of global wood production is estimated to be illegally produced, although the great uncertainty of these estimates is also acknowledged; most of this illegally produced wood is used domestically, although a significant portion enters the international trade either as finished products or raw materials (Seneca Creek and World Resources International, 2004). Estimates of illegal logging in specific countries and regions vary depending on the nature of the activity and the variability of laws and regulations (Figure 4).

4. Have forests been sustainably managed?

The movement for sustainable procurement of wood and paper-based products is driven to a large extent by the concern for how forests are affected by wood production. This concern has two major aspects:

• Sustainability – the balance of economic, social and environmental demands on the forest landscape. The maximization of wood production and minimization of cost should not upset the environmental and social balance of the landscape, either by removing trees at a quicker rate than they grow back or by paying insufficient attention to environmental or social concerns.
• Forest conversion and land-use change – the forest can change drastically after logging. It may be redesigned for tree production in a way that is significantly different from the forests that would naturally occur, or the forest can be converted to some other purpose that prevents trees from growing back.

Sustainable forestry

Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) is a management regime that integrates and balances social, economic, ecological, cultural, and spiritual needs of present and future generations (United Nations, 1992). Essential aspects of SFM include the following:

• Economic – the capacity of the forests to attract investment and support economically viable forest uses in the present and the future is undiminished. The forest is not used beyond its long-term capacity for production of wood, and non-wood forest products.

• Social – include a variety of aspects such as:
• The rights of indigenous peoples and local communities are respected and protected
• Forest workers are healthy, safe, and their rights are protected (e.g., freedom of association, right to bargain, child labor, forced labor, equal remuneration and non-discrimination)
• Local communities, including indigenous peoples, benefit economically from forest management
• Sites of religious, spiritual, archaeological, historic, as well as of aesthetic and recreational value are preserved.
• Environmental – forest use protects biodiversity (ecosystems, species, genes and ecological processes) and the capacity to maintain ecosystem processes and services such as watershed protection, pollination, protection against mudslides, aesthetic beauty, carbon storage, etc.

There are various approaches, positions, standards, and definitions of what SFM means and what specific management measures it requires. There are also various methods to measure progress towards SFM. Depending on the way their authors understand the concept and the management objectives, SFM standards for the same forest can be different. Regional standards for SFM can legitimately be somewhat different from one another, reflecting differences in forest types, legal frameworks, social conditions, and other factors. Mainstream standards for SFM differ on the following issues:

• Clearcutting – SFM standards, including CSA, FSC, PEFC and SFI, recognize clearcutting as consistent with SFM in the right forest ecosystems. Clearcutting can accomplish the following:
• It mimics some of the natural disturbance dynamics of the forests (e.g., fire, wind blow downs, insects)
• In some ecosystems, it allows regeneration and rapid growth of certain tree species
• It costs less, making forestry more economically viable
• It provides safer working conditions for loggers.

However, all SFM standards also recognize there is no single harvesting method suitable for all forest ecosystems.

• Plantations – plantations can focus production on smaller but more intensively managed areas. All SFM standards recognize plantations as being consistent with SFM under certain conditions; conditions may include considerations based on the ecological systems of the place, and the availability of land free from conflicts with other users.
• Chemicals – most standards allow controlled and appropriate use of chemicals (pesticides and fertilizers). Some standards prohibit the use of chemicals.
• Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) – some standards strictly prohibit the use of GMOs, while others will allow the use if and when legally available. At least 24 tree species have been known to have been the subject of transgenic research (for a list of species see WWF, 1999). In North America, however, no GM trees have been deregulated for commercial use.

Forest certification schemes define SFM through their respective standards (Table 3). All types of forests can be sustainably managed, from primary or natural forests to intensively managed forest plantations (Box 6).

Table 3. How major international certification schemes address selected aspects of SFM

	Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)	Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification Schemes (PEFC)
Social issues	Four principles of the FSC system include various social concerns: tenure and use rights and responsibilities, indigenous people’s rights, community relations, and workers’ rights. Principle related to high conservation value forests (HCVF) also addresses social aspects for areas of archaeological, historical or cultural value. Standardsetting processes at the national and sub-national level are conducted in a transparent way and involve all interested parties.	Requires compliance with ILO core conventions. Pan-European Operational Level Guidelines (PEOLG) criteria and indicators address issues of occupational safety and health as well as accessibility to recreation and maintenance of sites with cultural or spiritual values. ATO/ITTO criteria and indicators for SFM require that legal and customary rights of local populations with respect to ownership, use and tenure are clearly defined, acknowledged and respected, as well as engagement with informed stakeholders (PEOLG, ATO/ITTO Principles, criteria and indicators for SFM of African natural tropical forests).
Special places	Principle 9 addresses high conservation value forests (HCVF), which are areas to be managed in such a way that these values are maintained or enhanced. HCVF include: Forests that contain globally, regionally, or nationally significant concentrations of biodiversity values Globally, regionally, or nationally significant large landscape level forests Rare, threatened or endangered ecosystems Forest areas providing basic services of nature in critical situations Forest areas fundamental to meeting basic needs of local communities Forest areas critical to local communities’ traditional cultural identity	Forest management should maintain or enhance biodiversity, and protect soil and water. Sites of historical or spiritual significance should be respected and protected as specified by international guidelines and standards (PEFC, 2006 D). Different requirements specified by international standards, criteria and indicators and requirements for SFM, for instance: PEOLG Criterion 4.2i – special key biotopes in the forest such as water sources, wetlands, rocky outcrops and ravines should be protected or, where appropriate, restored when damaged by forest practices.
Forest plantations	Principles 6 and 10 of the FSC principles address forest plantations. Certified forest plantations should meet a set of requirements concerning: (i) representation on landscape; (ii) time of establishment; and, (iii) design of the management blocks (i.e., blocks promote biodiversity). Forest conversion to plantations or non-forest land uses should not occur except in circumstances where conversion entails a very limited portion of the forest management unit, does not occur in high conservation value areas, and will deliver long-term conservation benefits.	Management standards for forest plantations are to be compliant with the International Tropical Timber Organization and the PEOLG (PEFC, 2006D).
Chemicals	Principle 6 of FSC addresses chemicals. Chemicals should be minimized. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is the preferred approach, i.e., to minimize chemical use through the use of alternative prevention and biological control techniques. Documentation, monitoring, and control are required, and certain chemicals are banned.	Use of pesticides and herbicides should be minimized, used in controlled manner, and take into account appropriate silvicultural alternatives and other biological means. Compliance with PEOLG, ATO/ITTO criteria and indicators for SFM, as well as various ITTO guidelines for SFM (PEFC, 2007).
Clearcuts	Principle 6 of FSC addresses clearcuts. Restrictions on size and location vary among national/regional standards as long as ecological functions and values are maintained intact, enhanced or restored.	Management plans – including clearcutting – should be based on legislation as well as existing land-use plans and adequately cover forest resources. Regeneration, tending, and harvesting should be carried out in time and manner that do not reduce the productive capacity of the site (MCPFE, 1998).
GMOs	Use of GMOs is prohibited; addressed in Principle 6 of FSC.	As required by PEOLG, native species and local provenances should be preferred where appropriate. Introduced species, provenances or varieties producing negative impacts on ecosystems and on the genetic integrity of native species and natural provenances should be avoided or minimized as should those not thoroughly evaluated (MCPFE, 1998).

Source for FSC information is FSC (1996). This table provides an overview of the general characteristics of these two systems. This table is NOT meant to be an exhaustive comparison. A list of references to more detailed comparisons can be found in the section on additional resources.

Land-Use Change and Forest Conversion

Forests are naturally dynamic ecosystems. Natural processes (e.g., fire, flood, wind, earthquakes, mortality caused by insects, outbreaks of diseases, and the simple aging of trees) affect the composition and structure of all forests. Anthropogenic influences also change forest ecosystems, often in more dramatic and permanent ways. It is important to distinguish two different types of significant forest change, which are sometimes confused:

• Land-use change
• Forest conversion.

Land-use change, i.e., deforestation, reduces the area under forest. The United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) defines deforestation as “The conversion of forest to another land use or the long-term reduction of the tree canopy cover below the minimum 10 percent threshold” (FAO, 2001). Deforestation occurs when forest areas are transformed to other land uses such as:

• Agriculture: this includes shifting cultivation (traditional and colonist shifting cultivation), permanent cultivation (subsistence or commercial cultivation), and cattle ranching (small and large-scale cattle ranching). Agricultural expansion can replace native forests with pasturelands and crops. Palm oil, soy crops, and likely fuel crops in the near future, are considered the leading proximate cause for forest land use change in the tropics.
• Human settlement: urban development, colonization, transmigration and resettlement (spontaneous transmigration, estate settlement, industrial settlement, urban settlements).

• Infrastructure: transport infrastructure, market infrastructure (mills, food markets, storage, etc.), public services (water, sanitation), hydropower, energy and mining infrastructure.

Forest conversion happens when a natural forest is transformed into a highly cultivated forest, often with introduced tree species and control of the hydrological and nutrient regime with a focus on wood production.

FAO’s definition of deforestation specifically excludes areas where the forest is expected to regenerate naturally or with the aid of forest management measures following harvesting.

Over time, a significant amount of the world’s forest lands have been converted to other land uses. In the northern latitudes most of this change in land use occurred in the past. In some cases natural forests have reestablished themselves in these areas; in others forests have been planted. The managed forests we see today are often influenced by historical land uses, such as grazing or agriculture.

In the tropics, a major concern is the high rate of continued conversion of forests to other uses (Figure 6).

The causes of forest land use change vary by region, and even within a region. It is often a complex combination of intertwined factors and circumstances involving more than a single industry. Table 4 presents a general summary of some of the causes, drivers, and factors associated with forest land use change.

Commercial extraction of wood-based products, in combination with other factors and economic activities, has been linked to forest land use change. For instance:

• In Asia, logging concessions are often harvested and converted to plantations (mostly oil palm) because this change in use is usually less expensive than the selective logging needed to maintain the native forest. Under current economic and political incentives, there are faster and more profitable investment returns in palm oil plantations, and there is poor law enforcement and planning.
• In Central Africa and South America, logging companies open roads to extract/transport timber. These roads open the way for encroachment. An opening in the forest, combined with lack of enforcement and pressure from human populations, can result in change in use to subsistence farming or other agricultural operation.

Converting a forest into a forest plantation affects the balance of ecosystem services (e.g., it may eliminate species, affect erosion control and/or water supplies while increasing the production of wood), but converting forests to non-forest uses such as urban settlements completely eliminates the forest ecosystem. Forests deliver a variety of ecosystem services and benefits, but many of these are not recognized under the current economic and political situation and do not generate any revenue to the forest owner. Often the value of an intact natural forest or a standing forest or a forest plantation can be greater to society than the value of a converted forest area.

Table 4. Factors underlying forest land-use change and conversion in the tropics

Factors	Underlying Causes
Economic	Market growth and commercialization: rapid market growth of the export-oriented sector, increased market accessibility, growth of industries, lucrative foreign exchange earnings, growth of demand for goods and services. Economic structures: large individual speculative gains, poverty and related factors, economic downturn, crisis conditions. Urbanization and industrialization: growth of urban markets, rapid build-up of new forest-based (or related) industries. Special economic parameters: comparative advantages due to cheap, abundant production, factors in resource extraction and use, and price.
Policy and institutional	Policies: taxation, credits, subsidies, licenses, concessions, economic development, population (migration), and land ownership policies. Institutional factors: corruption, poor performance, mismanagement, etc. Property rights regime: insecure ownership, rush to establish property rights, titling, consolidation, open access conditions, etc.
Technological	Agro-technological changes, technological applications in the wood sector, and other production factors in agriculture.
Social and cultural	Social unrest and disorder (war, civil war, etc.), health and economic conditions, government policy failures. Cultural factors include concern (or lack of) towards forest protection and sustainable use.
Demographics	Population growth and increasing demand for products, food, space, etc.
Other	Soil quality, water availability, and slope, topography, and vegetation types.

Based on Geist and Lambin, 2001

Box 6. Plantations

The increasing demand for wood and paper-based products will likely be met, at least in part, through the establishment of new forest plantations. The area of forest plantations worldwide has been increasing to reach 140 million ha in 2005. Slightly less than half of the world’s plantations are in Asia while exceptionally fast increases were experienced in North America, Central America, Oceania and South America between 1990 and 2000 (FAO, 2006). This trend is expected to continue, especially in developing countries. Forest plantations currently make up 5% of world’s forest cover, but account for 35% of total global industrial wood production. There are advantages and disadvantages that need to be considered when sourcing from forest plantations.

Planted forests (plantations) may not provide the same ecosystem services natural forests provide, but they can play a positive role in other regards:

• By producing wood more efficiently, they may allow other natural forests to be managed for other forest values.
• When established on previously degraded sites they may recover some ecosystem functions and services. Increased recovery of degraded lands will play an important role in meeting future demand for wood and paper-based products and services including carbon sequestration and/or crops for fuels.

However, when forest plantations reduce the production costs for timber, products from natural forests may be at a disadvantage. If natural forests become less economically viable, it could cause owners to convert their lands to other more financially attractive land uses.

Advantages and disadvantages of plantations

Advantages	Disadvantages
Forest plantations can return degraded or worn out lands to productive use and protect soil from erosion.	There is often limited biodiversity if the forest is managed in single species plantations, resulting in reduced wildlife habitat and ecosystem value.
The rapid growth of forest plantations can produce more wood, faster, requiring less land to produce a specified amount of wood.	Diseases and pests which target a particular tree species can have devastating impacts in single species plantations.
Forest plantations enable landowners to take advantage of the newest forest technology and genetics. This results in greater yields and better prices, strong incentives for private landowners to continue to practice forestry on their lands.	Forest plantations often receive higher levels of inputs such as fertilizer and chemicals to control vegetative competition.
Wood harvested from forest plantations is often very uniform in terms of species and size, thereby improving processing and manufacturing efficiency.	Run-off, overspray and groundwater contamination can be issues if these practices are not carried out correctly.
Focusing wood production in fast-growing forest plantations can allow other native/natural forests to be managed for other uses such as biodiversity, non-wood forest products, and aesthetics.	Some forest plantations are established using non-native species. These plantations may not provide suitable habitat for local wildlife. Trees replacing grazing land may also adversely affect groundwater levels. If allowed to escape off-site, some non-native species may out-compete local tree species for available resources, and become a “weed” or invasive species.
Greater economic value of plantations can keep forest land in forest use, where a natural forest may not be economically sustainable.	Rights of local communities and indigenous peoples may be ignored. Forest plantations often take over large areas of land that become unavailable to other users (e.g., fuel-wood collection, non-wood forest products) and can distort income distribution in households and communities.
	Clearance of natural forests to establish plantations.

The two principal concerns about forest plantations are:

1. They may replace natural forest areas or areas in the forest landscape with unique qualities.
2. They may not be established in compliance with local laws regarding land occupation, and with authorization of local and indigenous peoples.

Sources: Boyer, 2006; FAO, 2007B; Nair, 2001.

Box 7. What constitutes a special place?

There is no universally agreed upon definition of special places. Existing definitions combine scientific and political dimensions through different features, but they often do not prioritize the features that take precedence. In general, stakeholders deem a forest “special” if it includes one or more of the following characteristics:

Biological, ecological and landscape features

• Species richness: number of species within a given area
• Species endemism: number of species found exclusively in that location
• Rarity: species and/or ecosystems that are naturally rare
• Representation: a site that represents all of the different ecosystems in the area of concern
• Significant or outstanding ecological or evolutionary processes, such as key breeding areas, migration routes, unique species assemblages, and so on
• Special species or taxa: presence of an umbrella, keystone, indicator, or flagship species. Site is habitat of a taxa of interest; for instance, wide-ranging species of waterfowl

Conservation features

• Threatened species: species that have been identified as threatened or endangered
• Species decline: species whose populations have undergone significant decline in recent years
• Habitat loss: areas that have lost a significant percentage of their primary habitat or vegetation
• Fragmentation: areas that have lost connectivity and have been fragmented into smaller pieces
• Large intact areas: areas within a certain minimum size with no or minimal human influence
• Level of threat: areas facing high or low pressure from human populations or development
• Places considered to have rare and exceptional scenic and aesthetic features

Ecosystem services

• Ability to supply basic and/or critical services such as watershed protection, erosion control, and fire/flood control among others

Cultural, livelihood, historical and spiritual features

• High value to the people who live within or around the site (e.g., for reasons of religion, history, cultural identity, or dependency for livelihoods); these include religious, historical and archaeological sites
• Critical significance to the traditional cultural identity of a local community
• Critical to maintaining local peoples’ livelihoods

The most critical and controversial issues around identifying special places have been:

• What process is used to define, identify and map special places?
• What, and how fair and effective, is the process to make and implement the decision?
• Who bears the cost?
• What is the effectiveness of existing special places protection?
• The criteria, or, how special is special enough?

Governmental action to identify special places (through zoning and land-use planning processes) provides due process for those affected and may provide compensation or spread the costs equitably. If government actions are perceived as insufficient, however, this can give way to individual and private actions.

Sources: IUCN, 2006; UNEP/WCMC’s Tree Conservation Information Service; Gordon et al., 2005.

Box 8. Pollutants

Pollutants of interest include:

• Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs): include a variety of organic chemicals including paints, lacquers, glues and adhesives, by-products of the processing wood, and others. VOCs are precursors of ground-level ozone.
• Nitrogen Oxides (NOx): NOx are also precursors of ground level ozone.
• Formaldehyde: in the atmosphere formaldehyde is rapidly broken down in atmospheric ions; formaldehyde is a component of acid rain.
• Methanol: methanol reacts in the air to produce formaldehyde and other chemicals that are washed out by rain. Methanol is the most common VOC found in the production of wood and paper-based products.
• Sulfur Compounds: in the atmosphere sulfuric acid contributes to acid rain, and it can be transported large distances from the point of release.
• Volume and Quality of the waste water including:
• Biochemical or Chemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) in the water discharge; BOD is the amount of oxygen that micro-organisms consume to degrade the organic material in the water. High levels of BOD can result in the reduction of dissolved oxygen in the water. This may adversely affect aquatic organisms. BOD is usually measured in kilograms per metric ton of pulp.
• Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) in the water discharge; COD is the amount of oxidizable organic matter and it can be used as an indicator of the quantity of organic matter in the water. COD is measured in kilograms per metric ton of pulp.
• Total Suspended Solids (TSS); measured in kilograms per metric ton.
• Absorbable Organic Halogens (AOX), including chlorine; there has been heavy pressure to stop using elemental chlorine in the bleaching processes because chlorine compounds can react with organics and generate chlorinated compounds (dioxins). Dioxins are persistent substances that have been considered a probable human carcinogen. AOX can be used as an indirect indicator of the quantity of chlorinated organic compound in the effluent. Reductions in the amounts of AOX can be used as indicator of continued technological improvement. However, AOX from ECF-bleached pulp do not contain highly chlorinated compounds.

Box 9. Bleaching of wood pulp

Wood is a composite material made of cellulose fibers, bonded and made rigid by lignin. To make paper, mechanical and chemical processes are used to separate the cellulose fibers from lignin and other compounds. Wood pulp intended for white paper products undergoes an additional bleaching process to remove residual lignin.

Bleaching increases the performance and the brightness of the fibers, increasing their absorbency and turning them from brown to white. In addition, bleaching disintegrates contaminating particles, such as bark, and reduces the tendency of pulp to turn yellow (an important feature for archiving of information).

Elemental Chlorine (EC), combined with small amounts of chlorine dioxide, was the historical bleaching agent of the paper industry. However, EC has been determined to be the source of highly chlorinated organic compounds (dioxins), which are toxic to animal and human health, and are considered a probable human carcinogen. Almost all of the global paper industry has stopped using EC and turned to alternative processes, including:

• Elemental Chlorine Free (ECF) – chlorine dioxide is substituted for EC in the bleaching process; some processes also use additional bleaching agents such as oxygen and hydrogen peroxide.
• Enhanced Elemental Chlorine Free (EECF) – removes more lignin and other contaminants before bleaching process through oxygen-based chemicals or prolonged delignification processes.
• Totally Chlorine Free (TCF) – uses oxygen-based chemicals such as ozone and hydrogen peroxide instead of chlorine-based compounds. TCF bleaching reduces the formation of pollutants but it can also use a greater amount of wood and energy per unit of product; TCF fibers may not entirely satisfy the performance needs of certain products.

Sources: Paper Task Force, 1995; Markets Initiative website.

Box 10. Alternative fibers

Non-wood fibers, or other agricultural residues, used in paper-making include flax, kenaf, hemp, bamboo, rye, wheat straw and fiber from sugar cane (bagasse).

Alternative fibers and agricultural residues have some advantages for paper-making:

• The demand for wood fibers from unsustainable sources is reduced, as is the pressure on forests for fiber production.
• Rural economies and employment can benefit. In India and China, in particular, non-wood fibers play an important role in some rural economies.

However, alternative fibers have failed to attract a strong interest from major industrial paper makers for several reasons:

• Poor availability and logistical difficulties – certain alternative fibers are not available throughout the year and storage capacity would be needed to feed mills year-round; production of alternative fibers may involve a large number of suppliers.
• Scale, supply and markets – the supply system and customer base for wood fiber are well established, whereas a supply system for alternative fibers would have to be designed and constructed, and offers less predictability and control.
• The need for intensive management – non-wood fibers would have to be grown as intensively-managed crops on large areas in order to sustain a large-scale manufacturing operation. The environmental side effects of this may be greater than those of SFM.
• Technical properties – some alternative fibers may not meet the performance requirements for certain products (e.g., rice straw for making newsprint). There are still some processing problems due to high silica content in some alternative fibers (e.g., straw).

Some key questions to consider when requesting paper made from alternative fibers:

1. Does it remove incentives to keep the landscape forested?
2. Do the environmental advantages persist when the production expands to the necessary scale, or does it result in more negative environmental impacts? (consider water use, chemical inputs, energy requirements, climate effects, etc).
3. What is the risk that forest land will be converted to agriculture?
4. What effects, both positive and negative, would this have on local communities and indigenous peoples?

Box 11. Recycling and environmental impacts

Wood and paper-based products have environmental implications at every stage of their life cycle. Recycling is better in general because it can reduce the demand on virgin fiber to a certain degree. From a life cycle assessment (LCA) perspective, the environmental impacts of fiber recycling and reuse need to be considered. Enhancing one aspect of fiber recycling could offset the benefits and increase the negative impacts in another stage of the life cycle of the product.
There are disagreements among stakeholders about the benefits and negative environmental impacts of recycled fiber.

	Virgin fiber product	Recycled fiber product
Raw material acquisition	Trees grown, harvested, transported and chipped.	Used products collected, transported, and sorted. There might be cases, where paper with high content of recycled fiber generates more fossil fuel-based CO2 emissions because of transportation.
Raw material processing	Water, energy, and chemicals used to extract fibers from wood chips.	Water, energy, and chemicals used to clean and re-pulp used products, remove fillers, and de-ink fibers.
Processing by-products	Air emissions, water effluent, non-hazardous waste (wastewater treatment residuals). Some solid waste used as soil nutrients.	Fewer air emissions, similar water effluent, significantly more wastewater treatment residuals.
Product manufacturing	Water and energy used to make paper from pulp.	Water and energy used to make paper from pulp. Recycled fibers can increase the amount of energy (including fossil fuel energy) needed in paper-making because they dry less efficiently. Fibers that shorten/break during recycling process can end up as solid waste.
Product use	The amount of fiber or product needed to perform a given task (i.e., make 100 copies, absorb 2 grams of fluid).	Recycling process breaks and stiffens fibers, resulting in reduced performance in some types of products. More fiber per sheet may be needed or more product used to adjust for poorer performance.
Product disposal	Paper products typically recycled or disposed as solid waste or in wastewater. When products are no longer recyclable they can be burned to generate energy	Similar disposal routes for products made from recycled fibers. When products are no longer recyclable they can be burned to generate energy.

Box 12. Life cycle assessment

A life cycle assessment (LCA) is a tool to objectively evaluate the overall environmental impacts associated with a product. LCA assesses the product and the inputs (energy, raw materials, water, etc.) and outputs (pollution to soil, water, oil, etc.) in a product’s life cycle from raw material extraction to final disposal. LCA is not a risk assessment tool because it stops at quantifying emissions without assessing their impacts. Additionally, LCA is a data-intensive methodology and data limitations (out-of-date, lack of data, or omissions) are common.

LCA is a useful tool to identify, prioritize and target actions to minimize negative environmental impact. LCAs can also be used to compare the environmental impact of alternative raw materials.

A number of LCAs have been completed for various wood-based products including:

• Wood as a building material
• Wooden furniture
• Comparison between single-use diapers with absorbent gels, commercially

laundered cloth diapers, and home-laundered cloth diapers

• Comparison of wood, concrete, and steel as building materials
• Comparison between using wood, aluminum and plastic to build a video/TV unit

•

• Comparison between solid wood, linoleum and vinyl as raw materials for flooring
• Comparison between wood, PVC and aluminum as raw materials to build window frames.

Some of the drawbacks of LCAs include:

• They account for environmental factors but not economic and social aspects
• LCAs do not address the renewable aspect of wood
• LCAs are undertaken on a case-by-case basis and thus, limited by the boundaries of the assessment.

A list of resources on LCA can be found in Section V.

Box 13. Forests and people

Forests are home to an estimated 800 million people around the world. To varying degrees more than 1.6 billion people depend on forests for their livelihoods (e.g., fuel wood, medicinal plants and forest foods). About 60 million indigenous people are dependent on forests, and in developing countries about 1.2 billion people rely directly on agroforestry farming systems that help sustain agricultural productivity and generate income.

An estimated 13 million people were formally employed in the forestry sector worldwide in the year 2000. This represents about 0.4% of the total labor force, but is likely an underestimation as it includes only the “visible” and “formal” activities. The International Labour Organization estimates that for every formal job in the forestry sector there are one or two informal jobs. The for