Yesterday I talked about how giving credit only to FSC-certified wood discriminates against North American wood for LEED projects. Today’s post discusses the widespread support shown by the forest community and government leaders to open the LEED standard.

SFI and FSC are both respected independent, non-profit charitable organizations. Both groups have third-party audits and have equal representation from environmental, social and economic chambers. Both protect endangered species and water quality. Both are promoting responsible forestry. SFI was specifically developed to advance sustainable forestry in North America, while FSC was developed in response to concerns over global deforestation, particularly in the tropics and subtropics.

With similar goals and rigorous certification standards, it doesn’t make sense not to include both standards in the LEED rating system. In fact, LEED should include all credible certification programs including the American Tree Farm System, the Canadian Standards Association and the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification. We’re not alone in that thought. Several in the forestry community, as well as government officials, have spoken out:

Larry Selzer, President and CEO, The Conservation Fund (statement March 2010)
“Independent certification of sustainable forest management, such as that provided by the SFI program, is a powerful tool for ensuring these forests are managed well, and it is long past due for certification programs such as the USGBC to recognize the value of the SFI and its peers. The Conservation Fund has been involved in the SFI Program since its inception because we see the incredibly positive results on the ground – and we believe consumers increasingly are recognizing the power of SFI to drive good conservation in our nation’s private forests.”

Canadian Council of Forest Ministers, Chair Kathy Dunderdale (Dec. 2, 2009 letter to USGBC)
“The draft benchmarks recently circulated for comment are so detailed and prescriptive that they would likely exclude most credible forest certification programs – even including several regional, national or interim FSC standards currently recognized in LEED … The environmentally preferable, as well as administratively more manageable, solution is for the USGBC to recognize all credible forest certification programs, namely the Canadian Standards Association Z809 standard, the Forest Stewardship Council, the Sustainable Forestry Initiative and national standards around the world independently endorsed by the Program for the Endorsement of Forest Certification.”

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (Feb. 16, 2010 letter to USGBC)
“Recognizing only FSC-certified wood in the LEED benchmarks will result in discrimination against wood products derived from well-managed lands in green building projects. The USGBC should fairly assess and include all credible forest certification programs, including SFI and ATFS systems.

I urge you to quickly make a board decision to recognize well-managed wood from Minnesota and all credible forest certification programs. In doing so, USGBC can join other government agencies and green building rating programs in recognizing wood as an environmentally friendly building material.”

Washington Governor Christine Gregoire (Oct. 2, 2008 letter to USGBC)
“By recognizing internationally endorsed certification systems, the proposed changes in USGBC policy have the potential to include forest products from more than 800 certified family forest owners in our state. Many more small forest parcels can be included as certification systems bring more lands under recognized sustainable management practices. Forest products from 4.8 million acres of third party audited state and industrial forestlands also have the opportunity to be included for LEED rating points under proposed changes in USGBC policy.”

Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln (April 16, 2010)
“I appreciate the efforts of the U.S. Green Building Council to promote energy efficiency and environmental conservation in building design and construction. I have been disappointed to learn, however, that the USGBC’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system discriminates against wood products produced in our own backyard and prohibits the two largest sustainable forest certification program in the U.S. – the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) and the American Tree Farm System (ATFS) – from gaining credit by recognizing only Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified wood.”

As you may have seen, the National Association of State Foresters and Canadian Institute of Forestry have also shown their support with letters to the USGBC.

We’re grateful that these and other leaders see a strong value to including SFI and other third-party certification systems in the LEED rating system. You can find a broader list of supporting statements on our website. Additionally, we’ve gotten extensive support in the way of signatures and comments on the petition to open LEED. I’ll share some of these comments in tomorrow’s post. And as always, find the latest information regarding the LEED issue on our website.

You’ve probably seen the U.S. and Canadian SFI statements on the LEED Certification credits referenced on our website, the petition and in various other mediums. These statements are meant to help people understand what we stand for and why LEED must change. Over the next four days, I would like to break down parts of the statements to give you a little more insight into why we feel so strongly about the U.S. Green Building Council opening the LEED Rating System.

SFI largely believes the current system discriminates against wood from North American forests. Currently, the LEED system only recognizes wood certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). More than three quarters of North America’s certified forests meet SFI, CSA or ATFS standards, while only one-quarter meet FSC standards. Additionally, more than 60 percent of the forests certified to FSC standards are located outside of North America.
When it comes to certified wood, LEED gives credit only to FSC certified wood products, effectively limiting the amount of North American wood that can earn points in LEED-certified green building projects in the U.S. and Canada. Using domestic products is especially important for government agencies, which have a responsibility to deliver economic benefits to communities across the country, as well as meet environmental goals. We’re not saying to stop using offshore products from certified sources; we’re saying forest products from your own backyard should be given equal access for a wood credit. Government-owned or occupied LEED buildings make up close to one third of all LEED projects.

According to the USGBC’s website, “Various LEED initiatives including legislation, executive orders, resolutions, ordinances, policies, and initiatives are found in 45 states, including 202 localities (138 cities, 36 counties, and 28 towns), 34 state governments (including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico), 14 federal agencies or departments, 17 public school jurisdictions, and 41 institutions of higher education across the United States.” It’s great to see the government backing green building, but why not support it (and our economy) with certified wood from this continent?

The LEED standard should also recognize the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) Sustainability Benchmarks. More than two-thirds of the world’s certified forests are managed in compliance with PEFC, which is SFI’s global partner. PEFC is the world’s largest forest certification system and widely used by small- and family forest owners, yet LEED inexplicably excludes wood certified to this standard too.

The United Nations has noted current “initiatives have a narrow focus, and sustainable development in the building and construction sector is still hampered by limited coordination and cooperation between different stakeholders throughout a building’s life span.” The UN goes on to say in order to advance green building, “it is necessary to create the conditions and incentives that would encourage stakeholders in the sector to jointly and more actively pursue sustainable building and construction in a life cycle perspective.” So why is the USGBC limiting certification to the FSC? Several experts in the forestry community, as well as government leaders, have spoken out with support for making the LEED system more inclusive. Read about this support tomorrow in part two of the series. Additionally, find the latest information regarding the LEED issue on our website.

Two major North American groups representing forestry experts have weighed in with the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) on the LEED standard.  Steven Koehn, president of the National Association of State Foresters (NASF), recently wrote a letter to USGBC CEO & Founding Chairman Rick Fedrizzi stating that the revised standard should:

The NASF is comprised of directors of forestry agencies across the U.S. and promotes forest conservation and sustainable forestry.

Additionally, Mr. Fedrizzi has received a letter urging LEED to be more inclusive from the Canadian Institute of Forestry. The organization also put out a press release about the LEED issue. President Anne LeBrun Ruff and Executive Director John F. Pineau state,

“Even though Canada has over 40% of the certified land globally, only 10% of the world’s forests are certified. Yet private and some government agencies are still splitting hairs over specific aspects of forest management certification systems. In doing this, the focus on the overall goal of sustainable management is lost. Each standard has a different background and assesses planning and practices in a slightly different way. However, the end result of sustainably managed forests is the same, which leads us to the issue at hand.”

They also make the vital point that wood is a smart choice for green building, yet many of its positive aspects are not recognized in the LEED rating system.

I’m pleased that the NASF and Canadian Institute of Forestry have taken a stand on the LEED issue. At SFI, we hope Mr. Fedrizzi and the rest of the USGBC listen to what the rest of the forestry community already knows—an inclusive stance better supports responsible forestry.

Michael T. Goergen, executive vice president and CEO of the Society of American Foresters, recently had an op-ed about opening the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED standard published in The Seattle Times. One important point he makes is:

“The only solicited comments the Building Council seems to be heeding are coming from groups bent on promoting a monopoly and others in the building sector who have very little, if anything, to do with forest products. I don’t understand why they ignore American foresters, who live and breathe forestry and go to school for years to understand how best to preserve and maintain one of our most precious natural resources.”

He goes on to give positive credit to the work SFI and the American Tree Farm System do. Additionally, Goergen points toward the economic benefits for the United States and Canada to open LEED, since most certified wood in North America is certified to standards other than the Forest Stewardship Council. As the trend for green building grows, using domestic wood certified by organizations such as SFI, ATFS and CSA only makes sense.

I’d encourage you to read the piece in full, and share with friends who care about the future of our forests and green building!

“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.”

We couldn’t agree more with the words written by Robert Cassidy, editor-in-chief of Building Design + Construction. His recent editorial discusses several points we’ve been bringing up for quite some time:

We encourage you to read his article in full. If you haven’t done so yet, add your name to the petition urging the USGBC to open the LEED rating system. We are delighted to see an increasing number of advocates taking a stand!