Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Analyzing Strategies to Enhance Small and Low Intensity Managed Forests Certification in Europe using SWOT-ANP

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Small-scale Forestry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Small forest holders own approximately 55 % of European forests. Forest certification can effectively support smallholders in environmental and socio-economic terms and increasing their access to certification is a priority for all the certification systems. With the aim of gaining a better insight into the smallholder certification scenario, this study identifies and analyzes the main factors influencing the diffusion of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) smallholder certification in Europe. Potential strategies to help FSC meet the requirement of smallholders—and as a consequence enhance their access to certification—are pointed out. First, European FSC certification reports were reviewed; second, a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats-Analytic Network Process (SWOT-ANP) analysis was applied. The review of the reports shows that FSC certification allows achieving substantial environmental and social improvements, making a valuable contribution to ordinary management. The SWOT-ANP analysis reveals a common awareness that the FSC scheme has been customized for the small-scale forestry over the last years—indeed, the certificates issued annually are increasing—but the need to make further progress and to provide adequate technical-managerial support to smallholders during all certification phases still emerge. Results from the economic analysis highlight that certification may be a good opportunity to increase commercial relationships and exchanges, by facilitating the entrance of certified products to dedicated high-value markets. Findings also highlight social and environmental shortcomings concerning forest workers conditions and management practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Auld G, Gulbrandsen LH, McDermott CL (2008) Certification schemes and the impacts on forests and forestry. Annu Rev Environ Resour 33:187–211. doi:10.1146/annurev.environ.33.013007.103754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bas E (2013) The integrated framework for analysis of electricity supply chain using an integrated SWOT-fuzzy TOPSIS methodology combined with AHP: the case of Turkey. Electr Power Energy Syst 44(1):897–907. doi:10.1016/j.ijepes.2012.08.045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackman A, Raimondi A, Cubbage F (2014) Does forest certification in developing countries have environmental benefits? Insights from Mexican corrective action requests. Environ for Dev, Discussion Paper Series April 2014

  • Bouslah K, M’Zali B, Turcotte MF, Kooli M (2010) The impact of forest certification on firm financial performance in Canada and the US. J Bus Ethics 96(4):551–572. doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0482-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns SL, Yapura PL, Giessen L (2016) State actors and international forest certification policy: coalitions behind FSC and PEFC in federal Argentina. Land Use Policy 52:23–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield R, Hansen E, Fletcher R, Nikinmaa H (2005) Forest certification and small forest enterprises: key trends and impacts, benefits and barriers. Forest Trends, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Cashore B (2002) Legitimacy and the privatization of environmental governance: how non-state market-driven (NSMD) governance systems gain rule-making authority. Governance 15(4):503–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cashore B, Auld G, Newsom D (2004) Governing through markets: forest certification and the emergence of non-state authority. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Catron J, Stainback GA, Dwivedi P, Lhotka JM (2013) Bioenergy development in Kentucky: a SWOT-ANP analysis. For Policy Econ 28:38–43. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2012.12.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelis van Kooten G, Nelson HW, Vertinsky I (2005) Certification of sustainable forest management practices: a global perspective on why countries certify. For Policy Econ 7(6):857–867

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creamer SF, Blatner KA, Butler BJ (2012) Certification of family forests: what influences owners’ awareness and participation? J For Econ 18(2):131–144. doi:10.1016/j.jfe.2011.12.001

    Google Scholar 

  • Crow S, Danks C (2010) Why certify? Motivations, outcomes and importance of facilitating organizations in certification of community-based forestry initiative. Small-Scale For 9(2):195–211. doi:10.1007/s11842-010-9110-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cubbage FW (1983) Economics of forest tract size: theory and literature. USDA Forest Sevice. General Technical Report 41

  • Elbakidze M, Angelstam P, Andersson K, Nordberg M, Pautov Y (2011) How does forest certification contribute to boreal biodiversity conservation? Standards and outcomes in Sweden and NW Russia. For Ecol Manag 262(11):1983–1995. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2011.08.040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2003) Commission recommendation of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32003H0361. Accessed 10 Oct 2015

  • Eurostat (2013) Agriculture, forestry and fishery statistics. European Union, Luxembourg. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3930297/5968754/KS-FK-13-001-EN.PDF. Accessed 20 May 2015

  • FSC (2008a) Creating ‘The Lisbon Process’. Report on the FSC and WWF Lisbon conference on smallholder and community-based forestry operations 7–10 May 2008. Forest Stewardship Council International Center, Bonn

  • FSC (2008b) Small, low intensity and community forests. Briefing note 1. Forest Stewardship Council, Bonn

  • FSC (2009a) FSC user-friendly guide to FSC certification for smallholders. Forest Stewardship Council International Center, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  • FSC (2009b) Guidance on the interpretation of FSC principles and criteria to take account of small scale and low intensity (FSC-gui-60-001 v1-0 en). Forest Stewardship Council International Center, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  • FSC (2010) Annual report. Forest Stewardship Council International Center, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  • FSC (2012) Global market survey. Forest Stewardship Council International Center, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  • FSC (2015) Facts and figures December 1, 2015. Forest Stewardship Council International Center, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  • Glück P, Avdibegović M et al (2011) Private forest owners in western Balkans. European Forest Institute, Joensuu

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Zamalloa MG, Caparros A, Ayanz ASM (2011) 15 years of forest certification in the European Union. Are we doing things right? For Syst 20(1):81–94. doi:10.5424/fs/2011201-9369

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajjar R (2013) Certifying small and community producers in developing countries: prospects for adoption and diffusion. For Trees Livelihoods 22(4):230–240. doi:10.1080/14728028.2013.837411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higman S, Nussbaum R (2002) How standards constrain certification of small forest enterprises. Proforest, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch F, Korotkov A, Wilnhammer M (2007) Private forest ownership in Europe. Unasylva, FAO, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Holvoet B, Muys M (2003) Sustainable forest management worldwide: a comparative assessment of standards. Int For Rev 6:99–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyde WF, Newman DH, Sedjo RA (1991) Forest economics and policy analysis: an overview. The World Bank, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Kajanus M, Leskinen P, Kurttila M, Kangas J (2012) Making use of MCDS methods in SWOT analysis—lessons learnt in strategic natural resources management. For Policy Econ 20:1–9. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2012.03.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas J (1992) Multiple-use planning of forest resources by using the analytic hierarchy process. Scan J For Res 7:259–268. doi:10.1080/02827589209382718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas J, Kurttila M, Kajanus M, Kangas A (2003) Evaluating the management strategies of a forestland estate—the S–O–S approach. J Environ Manag 69(4):349–358. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2003.09.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kartmann M, Smith A (2009) FSC reflected in scientific and professional literature. Forest Stewardship Council International Center, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotler P (1988) Marketing management: analysis, planning, implementation and control, 6th edn. Prentice-Hall International Edition, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurttila M, Pesonen M, Kangas J, Kajanus M (2000) Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis—a hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case. For Policy Econ 1(1):41–52. doi:10.1016/S1389-9341(99)00004-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lidestav G, Berg Lejon S (2011) Forest certification as an instrument for improved forest management within small-scale forestry. Small-Scale For 10(4):401–418. doi:10.1007/s11842-011-9156-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macqueen D (2013) Enabling condition for successful community forest enterprises. Small-Scale For 12(1):145–163. doi:10.1007/s11842-011-9193-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macqueen D, Dufey A et al (2008) Distinguishing community forest products in the market: industrial demand for a mechanism that brings together forest certification and fair trade. IIED Small and Medium Forestry Enterprise Series No. 22. IIED, Edinburgh

  • Maesano M, Lasserre B, Masiero M, Tonti D, Marchetti M (2014) First mapping of the main high conservation value forests (HCVFs) at national scale: the case of Italy. Plant Biosyst. doi:10.1080/11263504.2014.948524

    Google Scholar 

  • Masozera MK, Alavalapati JRR, Jacobson SK, Shresta RK (2006) Assessing the suitability of community-based management for the Nyungwe Forest Reserve, Rwanda. For Policy Econ 8(2):206–216. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2004.08.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza GA, Macoun P (1999) Guidelines for applying multi-criteria analysis to the assessment of criteria and indicators. Center for International Forestry Research, Jakarta

    Google Scholar 

  • Mikulková A, Hájek M, Štěpánková M, Ševčík M (2015) Forest certification as a tool to support sustainable development in forest management. J For Sci 61(8):359–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molnar A (2003) Forest certification and communities: looking forward to the next decade. Forest Trends, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Overdevest C (2010) Comparing forest certification schemes: the case of ratcheting standards in the forest sector. Socio-Econ Rev 8:47–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pesonen M, Kurttila M, Kangas J, Kajanus M, Heinonen P (2001) Assessing the priorities among resource management strategies at the Finnish Forest and Park Service. For Sci 47(4):534–541

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15(3):234–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmithüsen F, Hirsch F (2010) Private forest ownership in Europe. Geneva timber and forest study paper 26. United Nations, Geneva

  • Sevkli M, Oztekin A, Uysal O, Torlak G, Turkyilmaz A, Delen D (2012) Development of a fuzzy ANP based SWOT analysis for the airline industry in Turkey. Expert Syst Appl 39(1):14–24. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.06.047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siry JP, Cubbage FW, Newman DH (2009) Global forest ownership: implications for forest production, management and protection. In: Proceedings of the XIII world forestry congress (18–23 Oct 2009), Buenos Aires

  • Thornber K, Plouvier D, Bass S (1999) Certification: barriers to benefits, a discussion of equity implications. Discussion paper 8. European Forest Institute, Joensuu

  • Trishkin M, Lopatin E, Karjalainen T (2014) Assessment of motivation and attitudes of forest industry companies toward forest certification in northwestern Russia. Scan J For Res 29(3):283–293. doi:10.1080/02827581.2014.896938

    Google Scholar 

  • UNECE, Forest Europe and FAO (2011) State of Europe’s forests 2011. Forest Europe, Oslo

    Google Scholar 

  • UNFF (2009) Discussion paper contributed by the farmers and small forest landowners Major Group. In: United Nations Forum on Forests, eighth session. New York, 20 April–1 May 2009

  • Urquhart J, Courtney P (2011) Seeing the owner behind the trees: a typology of small-scale private woodland owners in England. For Policy Econ 13(7):535–544. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2011.05.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogt K, Larson B, Gordon JC, Vogt DJ, Fanzeres A (eds) (2000) Forest certification: roots, issue challenges and benefits. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheelen TL, Hunger JD (1995) Strategic management and business policy, 5th edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiersum KF, Humphries S, van Bommel S (2013) Certification of community forestry enterprises: experiences with incorporating community forestry in a global system for forest governance. Small-Scale For 12(1):15–31. doi:10.1007/s11842-011-9190-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yüksel I, Dağdeviren M (2007) Using the analytic network process (ANP) in a SWOT analysis—a case study for a textile firm. Inf Sci 17(7):3364–3382. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2007.01.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Y, Zhang D, Schelhas J (2005) Small-scale non-industrial private forest ownership in the United States: rationale and implications for forest management. Silva Fennica 39(3):443–454. http://www.metla.fi/silvafennica/full/sf39/sf393443.pdf. Accessed 20 May 2015

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to all of the Italian experts in the field of forest certification who had contributed to our SWOT-ANP analysis. Many thanks to Alessandro Leonardi for the starting idea and his valuable help. Thanks to FSC Italy which helped us to spread the questionnaire among smallholders, FSC members and auditors. We thank the reviewers and the Editor in Chief for helpful comments and suggestions that improved the quality of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DiBT Department of Bioscience and Territory, University of Molise, Contrada Fonte Lappone snc, 86090, Pesche, IS, Italy

    Giulio Di Lallo & Marco Marchetti

  2. Institute for World Forestry, University of Hamburg, Leuschnerstr. 91, 21031, Hamburg, Germany

    Giulio Di Lallo

  3. National Research Council of Italy (CNR), Institute for Agricultural and Forestry Systems in the Mediterranean (ISAFOM), Via Cavour, 4-6, 87036, Rende, CS, Italy

    Mauro Maesano

  4. Department of Land, Environment, Agriculture and Forestry (TESAF — Territorio e Sistemi Agro-Forestali Department), University of Padova, Via dell’Università 16 - Agripolis, 35020, Legnaro, PD, Italy

    Mauro Masiero

  5. Department of Innovation in Biological, Agro-Food and Forest System (DIBAF), University of Tuscia, Via San Camillo de Lellis, 01100, Viterbo, VT, Italy

    Giuseppe Scarascia Mugnozza

Authors
  1. Giulio Di Lallo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mauro Maesano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mauro Masiero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Giuseppe Scarascia Mugnozza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marco Marchetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giulio Di Lallo.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Di Lallo, G., Maesano, M., Masiero, M. et al. Analyzing Strategies to Enhance Small and Low Intensity Managed Forests Certification in Europe using SWOT-ANP. Small-scale Forestry 15, 393–411 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-016-9329-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-016-9329-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation