And forest professionals contribute a lot to forest certification. So it wasn’t a surprise when the Association of British Columbia Forest Professionals made certification the theme of its November/December magazine – BC Forest Professional – with articles on a range of topics, including SFI certification and audits.

In An SFI Audit: How it Works and What’s Involved, Chris Ridley-Thomas, who leads KPMG Performance Registrar Inc.’s forest certification practice, said the key factors that drive successful SFI audits are competent auditors, clear standards, reliable audit processes and transparent reporting.

He pointed out that regulatory compliance alone is not enough to achieve SFI certification. Chris said that’s because the SFI Standard has unique requirements such as landowner outreach, fiber sourcing and research, and because “. . . regulation provides a static performance target based on conditions to be avoided while voluntary standards provide a dynamic performance target based on processes to improve performance over time.”

In Interfor: 10 Years of SFI Certification, Gerry Fraser, Interfor’s Manager of Sustainable Forestry and a founding member of the Western Canada SFI Implementation Committee, looked back at some of the reasons why his company chose to be certified to the SFI standard in 2000.

“We chose SFI certification for a number of reasons,” Gerry wrote. “It meant we could integrate performance measures and objectives into the environmental management systems we had in place and SFI had broad recognition in the United States – our largest market. We found that certifying our lands gave us the incentive to improve practices and helped us strengthen and formalize many of the environmental and social actions that are part of doing business in British Columbia.”

And on the ground, he added, “the similarities between the three certification standards in British Columbia outweigh the differences.”  Gerry noted that most forest professionals in British Columbia choose SFI or Canadian Standards Association Z809 certification – and since lands certified to CSA are recognized by SFI, this means products from 95% of British Columbia’s certified lands are eligible to use the SFI chain-of-custody label.

If you’ve had a chance to check out the new section on our website – In Case You Were Wondering – you’ll know we welcome this kind of informed discussion about certification. A vote of thanks to Gerry and Chris for doing their part.

Independence and inclusion, rigorous third party audits and understanding eco labels are the themes covered throughout this area of our site. We showcase leaders in their respective fields with videos and information featuring me and other key contributors to forest certification:

Additionally, there is a “share” feature on each page, making it easy for you to post and email information about the site to your social networks.

I couldn’t be more excited about the site, and we hope you find it valuable. Feel free to share your feedback by commenting on the post or emailing info@sfiprogram.org.

So obviously I was delighted to see an article by John D. Wagner in the October issue of LBM Journal entitled LEED Acceptance of SFI Now Pending: Could SFI products finally achieve LEED credits?

Wagner’s column says the U.S. Green Building Council’s decision in June to list SFI and other forest certification standards equally in a section on ‘pre-authorized certifications and labels’ in LEED Pilot Credit 43 “has potentially opened the door for granting LEED credit to SFI-certified products for non-structural wood items, such as furniture, flooring, and windows.”

The item appeared shortly after the U.S. Department of Agriculture stated in a news release: “Sustainability of forest products can be verified using any credible third-party rating system, such as Sustainable Forestry Initiative, Forest Stewardship Council or American Tree Farm System certification.”

The USDA was announcing a new report that supports what a lot of us have been saying for a long time – using wood obtained through sustainable forestry practices in green building applications promotes a healthy environment and a strong economy.

Right now, only wood certified to the Forest Stewardship Council – which accounts for about one quarter of North America’s certified forests – is eligible for the LEED certified wood credit. Most FSC-certified forests are outside of North America, and 90 percent are outside of the United States. It was nice that the USDA explicitly recognized standards that are widely represented here, like SFI and Tree Farm.

USGBC really needs to start paying attention to the evidence being put forward by the USDA and so many others, and extend the inclusive approach in the pilot credit to all LEED 2012 rating tools. This would encourage more builders to use North American wood in green building projects – and make it a lot easier for them to find the products they need.

Wagner – an award-winning author and consultant on green building – knows what he is talking about because he has been following SFI for years, and was at our last two conferences. So it means a lot to me when he says: “. . . I would urge doubters to check out SFI. It really is a solid and balanced organization, run by very decent people with a clear sense of their sustainability mission.”

USGBC needs to know it is finally heading in the right direction with Pilot Credit 43 – there is no deadline to post comments through the LEED user forum. If you want more information, check out our update link on USGBC, LEED and SFI.

I would like all stakeholders to send their feedback on this second draft of LEED 2012 by September 14^th, plus I strongly encourage you to send positive feedback on USGBC’s LEED Pilot Credit 43. This pilot credit for non-structural certified wood products (furniture, flooring, windows) lists SFI, FSC and other forest certification standards equally in a section on ‘pre-approved certifications and labels’.  We would like to keep this positive pilot credit language top of mind.

Pilot Credits are used in USGBC to test drive an idea before making it an official credit in the LEED rating tool.  USGBC refers to pilot credits as “multi-stakeholder market tests” and relies heavily on user input.

We specifically want those commenting on this Pilot Credit 43 to ask that this language be extended into all LEED 2012 rating tools and that this language be extended to also include structural wood products (not just non-structural as is currently the case.) A few examples why we believe Pilot Credit 43 is positive include:

Again, we encourage you to work with builders and architects to post comments on the LEED User blog and keep this pivotal turning point by the USGBC top of mind.

Below is Robert’s article for you to read.

END THE BATTLE OF FSC VS. SFI WOOD IN LEED
Building Design & Construction

By Robert Cassidy, Editor-in-Chief
Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Enough already! For the past decade, the USGBC has given the Forest Stewardship Council a monopoly on wood from its forests being used in LEED projects. It’s time for the USGBC to open the door to other wood certification programs.

Consider this: Sixty percent of FSC-certified wood comes from outside the U.S. and Canada. Why does the USGBC encourage the importation of FSC wood from thousands of miles away, when at the same time it offers a credit for using locally produced materials—the so-called “500-mile rule”?

Wouldn’t it be more environmentally beneficial to use locally grown wood, shipped over much shorter distances? Between them, the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) and the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) have 373 million acres of certified forests. SFI alone has about 80% of the certified woodlands in North America, while FSC has only 18%. Building Teams in the U.S. and Canada are being forced in many cases to go overseas instead of being able to use certified wood from their own backyards.

Here’s another inconsistency: Why doesn’t the USGBC require other building products to “prove” their environmental bona fides to the same extent that it does wood products? Why do steel and glass and ceiling tiles and hundreds of other building products get a pass, while wood has to go through 49 mandatory benchmarks to be considered for use under LEED? Are all these products and materials so environmentally pure?

Take cement, the key ingredient in the manufacture of concrete, without which not a whole lot of building would get done. But did you know that the cement industry produces about 5% of all carbon emissions globally, a fact I was first made aware of by Scot Horst, for years chair of the LEED Steering Committee and now the USGBC’s SVP of LEED?

I would bet that very few of the 130,000 or more LEED Accredited Professionals out there would hesitate to use cement-containing concrete in their LEED projects. But are they aware that, in doing so, they are contributing to global warming, with its deleterious impact on the environment and human health?

I don’t mean to single out the cement and concrete industry, which (at least outside of China and India) is working hard to reduce its emissions. But the question remains: Why isn’t the USGBC devoting the same rigorous attention to other building products that it has so diligently bestowed on wood products?

Green Globes, the U.K.’s BREEAM, Built Green Canada, Japan’s CASBEE, and the ANSI National Green Building Standard recognize SFI and other wood certification standards. Australia’s Green Building Council recently rescinded its FSC-only restriction.

Could it be that the anti-lumber industry lobby within USGBC simply cannot bear the fact that SFI, CSA, and other certifications are just as good as FSC’s?

Click here for the original article: http://www.bdcnetwork.com/end-battle-fsc-vs-sfi-wood-leed

Last week I attended the Sustainable Brands ‘11 Conference in Monterey, CA, which brought together more than 700 global sustainability strategists, product designers and top brand executives working toward a more sustainable future. The conference provided a great venue to hear what other companies are doing and to exchange and discuss new ideas with other likeminded individuals.

I had the honor of introducing a group of world class experts during the “Supply Chain, Sourcing, and Community Partnerships” track. This theme resonates so strongly with the SFI program, the work we do and with our recently released 2011 Progress Report themes: conservation, community and integrity and our focus on the Conservation and Community Partnerships Grant Program. By addressing the avoidance of controversial sources; improving wildlife habitat management and conservation of biodiversity; and supporting community projects, we work together to ensure our forests continue to offer the many values we treasure now and in the future.

The speakers I introduced repeatedly stressed the need to collaborate and provide consumers with traceability and innovation. Alice Quan, Senior Director at Walmart.com for Trend + Product Development, Sustainability, agrees: “Simple ideas can make a huge impact and transparency is now the expectation among consumers. But it is essential for all of us to work together to inspire societal progress and move us all toward a sustainable future.”

I also had the pleasure to listen and talk to many great speakers. One of them was Erin Schrode from Teens Turning Green. The 20-year-old enthralled the audience as she was telling us about teens’ consumption, their demand for responsible products and the importance of engaging with Millenials. Other inspiring speakers included Bonnie Nixon from the Sustainability Consortium and Eric Ostern from Unilever. Like SFI, they both stressed the need to be completely transparent and collaborate with one another instead of work on our own.

I hope that in speaking to attendees at our exhibitor booth, I stimulated a critical commitment to source responsibly. Our goal for the conference was to look at the bigger picture and to inspire major brands to show they care about responsible forestry by including fiber from SFI-certified forests and other responsible sources in their supply chain. We look forward to working with Sustainable Brands in the future to promote responsible forestry and encourage creative innovation and behavior change.