*Gobal CA-CoP* *CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE*

*for sustainable production intensification and land management*

Dear Subscribers,

I thought many of you would find the following from Bioplan on
'Conservation Effectiveness' interesting and relevant to CA!

Apologies for any cross-posting.

*Amir Kassam *

*Moderator*

e-mail: [log in to unmask]
URL: www.fao.org/ag/ca

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Duthie <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:13 PM
Subject: Mongabay series on "Conservation Effectiveness"
To: bioplan <[log in to unmask]>


Dear BIOPLANNERS,

Apologies for the cross-posting, but the ever-productive Mongabay has just
kicked off a new in-depth series looking at conservation effectiveness.

The first article, on forest certification, can be accessed here: -
https://news.mongabay.com/2017/09/does-forest-certification-really-work/

The article analysis is heavily hyperlinked with infographics, so is best
read online and I am not pasting it below, except for the last part -
Verdict.

Zuzana Burivalova, a tropical forest ecologist at Princeton, who performed
the analysis of the scientific literature on forest certification, is
interviewed in the first 22 minutes of the Mongabay podcast here:
https://news.mongabay.com/2017/10/audio-taking-a-closer-
look-at-the-evidence-for-conservation-effectiveness/

The final article was written by Shreya Dasgupta.

The next feature is on payments for ecological services.

Best wishes

David Duthie

*************************
Verdict

Despite the rapid expansion of FSC certification over the past 20-plus
years, we found only limited rigorous science investigating its effects.

What little research there is suggests that FSC-certified and RIL-managed
forests are better for the environment than conventionally managed forests
for several outcomes. But for one of certification’s primary environmental
goals — reducing deforestation — the evidence is currently poor. It is also
important to remember that not all FSC certified concessions use RIL
practices, so there is a measure of uncertainty in these conclusions.

The handful of studies looking at the impacts of certification on workers
and local communities are limited in terms of the geographical areas they
cover and the outcomes they focus on. So even though a few studies do show
some social benefits, there is not enough evidence yet to show that FSC
certified forests are indeed good for people.

Profits for logging companies also seem hard to come by, or at least they
may take a long time to materialize. And while certified or “sustainably”
harvested timber can fetch higher prices compared to timber from
non-certified, conventionally managed forests, this premium seems to vary a
lot.

The available research is also heavily biased towards Asia (19 studies), as
well as Central and South America (18 studies), while Africa remains poorly
understood (seven studies).

Forest certification, like any other conservation strategy, works in
complex, continually changing contexts. Companies have varied backgrounds
and they operate in varied settings with a range of logistical, social, and
business challenges. This is where evidence can be helpful.

Good science can help tease out the conditions that make forest
certification succeed or fail. It can point out areas that lack data and
need further study.

“Scientific evidence can help inform FSC’s policy and other decision makers
about where the strengths, weaknesses and potentials of the certification
scheme are,” Karmann said.

A solid evidence base can also help companies and certificate holders make
credible promotional claims for their products, which can then help
consumers make the right choice, she added.

For consumers, choices are plenty. So an FSC logo with science backing its
sustainability claims could be the key to steering consumers towards
certified products.

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the CA-Cop-L list, click the following link:
&*TICKET_URL(CA-Cop-L,SIGNOFF);