To paraphrase Henry Ford, you can have environmental certification in any colour, so long as it’s Forest Stewardship Council (FSC).
I know we’ve said it before, but given this week’s news that the construction union UCATT is exclusively commending FSC, it bears repeating that the above is
still the line being towed by many environmentalists. They still consider the FSC the only certification scheme worth its salt and that’s what they’re broadcasting to the wider world.
UCATT told TTJ that it is backing FSC certification of timber construction products, as part of its strategy to make the UK building industry more “sustainable”, precisely because the scheme was recommended to it by the environmentalists.
Tellingly, though, a spokesperson for the union also said he had not heard of the other main scheme in Europe operated by the Pan European Forest Certification Council – now renamed the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification Schemes to reflect its increasingly global presence.
Nobody says it’s going to be easy, but the obvious conclusion from all this is that the profiles of the PEFC and other certification schemes still need to be raised higher in the market.
Like Henry Ford’s black Model T, there’s nothing wrong with the FSC certification scheme. On the contrary, it has done tremendous work helping the forestry and timber industry worldwide to improve its environmental performance, and prove that it’s done so. But the diversity of the industry and forestry globally means a range of schemes is needed and that message obviously needs putting across.
The good news is that an increasing number of leading players in the timber industry are opting for dual certification with, for instance, Stora Enso, Timbmet and Travis Perkins all securing both FSC and PEFC accreditation and promoting the fact to their customers. This will no doubt help broaden the certification perspective of the timber-using and specifying market and, hopefully, the unions too.
