Environmental Management

, Volume 51, Issue 3, pp 524–540 | Cite as

Certified and Uncertified Logging Concessions Compared in Gabon: Changes in Stand Structure, Tree Species, and Biomass

  • V. P. MedjibeEmail author
  • Francis E. Putz
  • Claudia Romero


Forest management certification is assumed to promote sustainable forest management, but there is little field-based evidence to support this claim. To help fill this gap, we compared a Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)-certified with an adjacent uncertified, conventionally logged concession (CL) in Gabon on the basis of logging damage, above-ground biomass (AGB), and tree species diversity and composition. Before logging, we marked, mapped, and measured all trees >10 cm dbh in 20 and twelve 1-ha permanent plots in the FSC and CL areas, respectively. Soil and tree damage due to felling, skidding, and road-related activities was then assessed 2–3 months after the 508 ha FSC study area and the 200 ha CL study area were selectively logged at respective intensities of 5.7 m3/ha (0.39 trees/ha) and 11.4 m3/ha (0.76 trees/ha). For each tree felled, averages of 9.1 and 20.9 other trees were damaged in the FSC and CL plots, respectively; when expressed as the impacts per timber volume extracted, the values did not differ between the two treatments. Skid trails covered 2.9 % more of the CL surface, but skid trail length per unit timber volume extracted was not greater. Logging roads were wider in the CL than FSC site and disturbed 4.7 % more of the surface. Overall, logging caused declines in AGB of 7.1 and 13.4 % at the FSC and CL sites, respectively. Changes in tree species composition were small but greater for the CL site. Based on these findings and in light of the pseudoreplicated study design with less-than perfect counterfactual, we cautiously conclude that certification yields environmental benefits even after accounting for differences in logging intensities.


Congo basin forests FSC certification Conventional logging Tree species diversity Above-ground biomass Logging damage 



This study was supported by the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS)-Gabon Program via the AFD-NGO partnership. Additional support came from a WWF Kathryn Fuller Doctoral Fellowship to VPM. We thank CEB and SEEF for permission to work in their concessions. Logistical support was provided by WCS-Gabon. We gratefully acknowledge MP Starkey, NF Mapouka and the hard work of field assistants JC Mouandza, Y Mihindo, JP Mondjo, R Aba’a Nseme, HR Memiaghe, A Moukala and A Moukambi. Comments on earlier versions of this manuscript by JR Poulsen and A Shenkin are also acknowledged.


  1. Andam KS, Ferraro PJ, Pfaff A, Sanchez-Azofeifa GA, Robalino JA (2008) Measuring the effectiveness of protected area networks in reducing deforestation. Proc Natl Acad Sci (USA) 105:16089–16094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Auld G, Gulbrandsen LH, McDermott CL (2008) Certification schemes and the impacts on forests and forestry. Ann Rev Environ Res 33:187–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bamberger M, Carden F, Rugh J (2009). Summary of session 713 think tank: alternatives to the conventional counterfactual. Meeting of the American Evaluation Association, Orlando, Florida 2009. Available at Accessed Aug 2012)
  4. Blackman A, Rivera J (2010) The evidence base for environmental and socioeconomic impacts of “sustainable” certification. Discussion paper, Resources for the future RFF DP 10-17. Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. Blanc L, Echard M, Herault B, Bonal D, Marcon E, Chave J, Baraloto C (2009) Dynamics of aboveground carbon stocks in a selectively logged tropical forest. Ecol App 19:1397–1404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Borcard D, Gillet F, Legendre P (2011) Numerical ecology with R. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brokaw NVL (1982) The definition of tree-fall gap and its effect on measures of forest dynamics. Biotropica 14:158–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burger D, Hess J, Lang B (2005) Forest certification: an innovative instrument in the service of sustainable development? Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische ZusammenarbeitGoogle Scholar
  9. CEB (Compagnie Equatoriale de Bois) (2007) Résumé publique du plan d’aménagement. Precious Woods and TERRAGoogle Scholar
  10. Cerutti PO, Tacconi L, Nasi R, Lescuyer G (2011) Legal vs. certified timber: preliminary impacts of forest certification in Cameroon. For Pol Econ 13:184–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chave J, Andalo C, Brown S, Cairns MA, Chambers JQ, Eamus D, Fölster H, Fromard F, Higuchi N, Kira T, Lescure JP, Nelson BW, Ogawa H, Puig H, Riéra B, Yamakura T (2005) Tree allometry and improved estimation of carbon stocks and balance in tropical forests. Oecologia 145:87–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Colwell RK (2006) EstimateS: statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 8. persistent URL
  13. de Wasseige C, Devers D, de Marcken P, Eba’a Atyi R, Nasi R, Mayaux Ph (2009) The forests of the congo basin—state of the forest 2008, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. doi: 10.2788/32259
  14. Doucet JL (2003) L’alliance délicate de la gestion forestière et de la biodiversité dans les forêts du centre du Gabon. Thèse de doctorat, Faculté Universitaire des Sciences Agronomiques, B-5030 GemblouxGoogle Scholar
  15. Durrieu de Madron L, Fontez B, Dipapoundji B (2000) Dégâts d’exploitation et de débardage en fonction de l’intensité d’exploitation en forêt dense humide d’Afrique Centrale. Bois For Trop 264:57–60Google Scholar
  16. Eba’a Atyi R (2004) Forest certification in Gabon. Paper presented at the symposium: Forest certification in developing and transitioning societies: social, economic, and ecological effects. Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, New Haven, Connecticut, USAGoogle Scholar
  17. Eba’a Atyi R (2006) Forest certification in Gabon. In: Cashore B, Gale F, Meidinger E, Newsom D (2006) Confronting sustainability: forest certification in developing and transitioning countries. Yale F&ES Publication Series, Report Number 8. New Haven, Connecticut, USAGoogle Scholar
  18. Eba'a Atyi R, Simula M (2002) Forest Certification: pending challenges for tropical timber. International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) Technical Series No. 19. Yokohama, Japan: ITTOGoogle Scholar
  19. FAO (2003) Regional code of practice for reduced-impact harvesting in tropical moist forests of west and central Africa. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
  20. FAO (2005) Global forest resource assessment 2005. Progress towards sustainable forest management. FAO forest paper 174. Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  21. Forest Certification System (2011) Certification public report. Forest management certification. Available from Reported 17 Dec 2008; cited 16 Feb 2012
  22. Hall JS, Harris DJ, Medjibe V, Ashton PMS (2003) The effects of selective logging on forest structure and tree species composition in a central African forest: implications for management of conservation areas. For Ecol Manag 183:249–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Halme PT, Toivanen T, Honkanen M, Kotiaho JS, Monkkonen M, Timonen J (2010) Flawed meta-analysis of biodiversity effects of forest management. Conserv Biol 24:1154–1156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Heffner RA, Butler MJ, Reilly CK (1996) Pseudoreplication revisited. Ecology 77:255–2562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hulbert SH (1984) Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecol Mono 54:187–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hurlbert SH (2004) On misinterpretations of pseudoreplication and related matters: a reply to Oksanen. Oikos 104:591–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jonkers WBJ (2000) Logging, damage and efficiency: a study of the feasibility of the reduced impact logging in Cameroon. Tropenbos Cameroon Report 00-3, Tropenbos-Cameroon Programme, Kribi, CameroonGoogle Scholar
  28. Leonard G, Richard A (1993) Le Gabon. Institut Pédogogique National, 287 p. In: Drouineau S, Nasi R, Legault F, Cazet M (1999) L’aménagement forestier au Gabon: historique, bilan, perspectives. Document No.19 Série FORAFRI. CIRAD-Forêt, Montpellier, FranceGoogle Scholar
  29. Martin D, Chatelin Y, Collinet J, Guichard E, Sala G (1981) Les sols du Gabon : pédogenèse, répartition et aptitudes : cartes à 1:2 000 000—Paris (FRA): ORSTOM, Office de la recherche scientifique et technique outre mer. Notice Explicative, No 92Google Scholar
  30. Mazzei L, Sist P, Ruschel A, Putz FE, Marco P, Peña W, Ferreira JER (2010) Above-ground biomass dynamics after reduced-impact logging in the Eastern Amazon. For Ecol Manag 259:367–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Medjibe VP, Putz FE (2012) Cost comparison of reduced-impact and conventional logging in the tropics. J For Econ 18:242–256Google Scholar
  32. Nasi R, Forni E (2006) Exploitation industrielle du bois, aménagement forestier et impacts environnementaux. In: Nasi R, Nguinguiri JC, Ezzine de Blas D (eds) Exploitation et gestion durable des forêts d’Afrique Centrale: la quête de la durabilité. L’Harmattan, Paris, pp 243–265Google Scholar
  33. Nasi R, Billand A, Vanvliet N (2012) Managing for timber and biodiversity in the Congo Basin. For Ecol Manag 268:103–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Oksanen L (2001) Logic of experiment in ecology: is pseudoreplication a pseudoissue? Oikos 94:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O’Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Wagner H (2011) Package “vegan”. Community ecology package Version 2.0-0.,
  36. Paillet Y, Bergès L, Hjältén J et al (2010) Biodiversity differences between managed and unmanaged forests: meta-analysis of species richness in Europe. Conserv Biol 24:101–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pattanayak SK, Wunder S, Ferraro PJ (2010) Show me the money: do payments supply environmental services in developing countries? Rev Environ Econ Pol 4:254–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Poulsen JR, Clark CJ, Mavah G, Elkan PW (2009) Bushmeat supply and consumption in a tropical logging concession in northern Congo. Conserv Biol 23:1597–1608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Putz FE, Nasi R (2009) Carbon benefits from avoiding and repairing forest degradation. In: Angelsen A, Brockhaus M, Kanninen M, Sills E, Sunderlin WD, Wertz-Kanounnikoff S (eds) Realising REDD+: National strategy and policy options. CIFOR, Bogor, IndonesiaGoogle Scholar
  40. Putz FE, Sist P, Fredericksen T, Dykstra D (2008a) Reduced-impact logging: challenges and opportunities. For Ecol Manag 256:1427–1433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Putz FE, Zuidema PA, Pinard MA, Boot RGA, Sayer JA, Sheil D, Sist P, Vanclay EJK (2008b) Tropical forest management for carbon retention. PLoS Biol 6:1368–1369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Putz FE, Zuidema PA, Synnott T, Peña-Claros M, Pinard MA, Sheil D, Vanclay JK, Sist P, Gourlet-Fleury S, Griscom B, Palmer J, Zagt R (2012) Sustaining conservation values in selectively logged tropical forests: the attained and the attainable. Conserv Lett. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00242.x Google Scholar
  43. R Development Core Team (2010) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Version 2.11.1. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Accessed 6 Sep 2010
  44. Ruiz Perez M, Ezzine de Blas D, Nasi R, Sayer JA, Sassen M, Angoue C, Gami N, Ndoye O, Ngono G, Nguinguiri JC, Nzala D, Toirambe B, Yalibanda Y (2005) Logging in the Congo Basin: a multi-country characterization of timber companies. For Ecol Manag 241:231–236Google Scholar
  45. Sheil D, Meijaard E (2010) Purity and prejudice: deluding ourselves about biodiversity conservation. Biotropica 42:566–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sheil D, Nasi R, Johnson B (2004) Ecological criteria and indicators for tropical forest landscapes: challenges in the search for progress. Ecol Soc 9(1):7. [online] URL: Google Scholar
  47. Sist P, Ferreira FN (2007) Sustainability of reduced-impact logging in the Eastern Amazon. For Ecol Manag 243:199–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Système de Certification FSC (2011) Rapport publique de certification. Certification de gestion forestière. Available from Reported 29 Dec 2011; cited 16 Feb 2012
  49. Tikina ATV, Innes JIL (2008) A framework for assessing the effectiveness of forest certification. Can J For Res 38:1357–1365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. van Kuijk M, Putz FE, Zagt RJ (2009) Effects of forest certification on biodiversity. Tropenbos International, Wageningen, the NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  51. White LJT (1994) The effects of commercial mechanized selective logging on a transect in lowland rainforest in the Lope Reserve, Gabon. J Trop Ecol 10:313–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. White H, Phillips D (2012) Addressing attribution of cause and effect in small “N” impact evaluations: towards an integrated framework. Working Paper 15. International Initiative for Impact Evaluation 3iE. London, UKGoogle Scholar
  53. WRI (World Resources Institute) (2009) Atlas forestier interactif du Gabon (version pilote): document de synthèse. WRI, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  54. Write PA, Gregory A, Hoekstra T, Tegler B, Turner M (2002) Monitoring for forest management unit scale sustainability. Final report of the local unit criteria and indicators development (LUCID) test: executive summary. USDA Forest Service IMI (Inventory and Monitoring Institute) Report 4, Fort Collins, Colorado, USAGoogle Scholar
  55. Zanne AE, Lopez-Gonzalez G, Coomes DA, Ilic J, Jansen S, Lewis SL, Miller RB, Swenson NG, Wiemann MC, Chave J (2009) Global wood density database. Dryad. Retrieved from: Accessed 23 June 2010

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. P. Medjibe
    • 1
    Email author
  • Francis E. Putz
    • 1
  • Claudia Romero
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biology and School of Natural Resources and the EnvironmentUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA
  2. 2.Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR)BogorIndonesia

Personalised recommendations