Here are just a few of the highlights from this year’s report:

• 5,584 resource and logging professionals trained in 2010;
• $81.4 million invested by program participants in forest research activities in 2010;
• 948 SFI Implementation Committee members;
• 36% increase in chain-of-custody certified locations from the start of 2010 to April 2011;
• SFI commitment of $1.1 million through its Conservation and Community Partnerships Grant Program in 2010 and 2011 – a total value of $4.2 million once partner contributions are included;
• more than five million acres/two million hectares of lands held or managed by Aboriginal communities certified to the SFI 2010-2014 Standard;
• new SFI on-product labels to strengthen transparency.

It’s obvious why the title of our Progress Report is The Bigger Picture: Conservation. Community. Integrity.

For SFI Inc., a rigorous certification standard is a starting point – it anchors an independent program broader than any other third-party forest certification program in North America; one that supports conservation research, reaches out to communities, and is built on integrity.

SFI Inc. Board Chair Bob Luoto put it well in his message: “. . . what impresses me most about the program is the fact that literally thousands of people across North America are putting it to work . . .”

We invited certification bodies who conduct the detailed third-party audits to the SFI standard to submit comments. Mike Ferruci of NSF-ISAR Forestry Program spoke to the SFI program rigor: “My advice for companies that want to be SFI certified is to make sure everything is in order before I arrive. I have no choice – if the SFI standard requirements are not being met, and I see a major non-conformance, I won’t be issuing an SFI certificate.”

SFI stands with other certification programs as a respected, internationally recognized standard. It also stands alone. It is the only program in North America requiring that program participants support and engage in research activities, that they broaden the practice of sustainable forestry through landowner and public outreach. It stands alone as the only program with a grassroots network of SFI Implementation Committees who train loggers and participate in important community events.

Conservation. Integrity. Community. All important parts of the SFI bigger picture as we work together to ensure our forests continue to offer the many values we treasure to our children, and to their children.

Read the full report here

Read our news release here

Phil talks about the downsides of well-funded campaigns that skim the surface of complex issues, and lead consumers to believe that something as simple as using paper that’s recycled or certified to the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) automatically yields environmental benefits.

In his second blog – Are environmental campaigns misleading the public? Part II – Phil challenges claims that certain certification standards, such as FSC, are more protective of the environment at a global scale. Phil says a 2005 international study (the World Wildlife Fund was one of the study partners) looked at on-the-ground differences between certification schemes in Canada, Finland and the UK, and did not identify any as “destructive and inferior” nor did it identify any as “much better” as campaigners would have us believe.

He says competition has been healthy and improved all certification programs, and this in turn supports responsible forest management as well as price and supply stability. It encourages more certification and is more likely to benefit communities in countries where campaigners and most of their supporters live.

Committing to one scheme could reduce purchasing and negotiating options for buyers, and disadvantage local communities in North America. Phil recalls a campaign where a large U.S.-based corporation was pressured to buy recycled and/or FSC paper, and eventually gave its business to a European mill that received FSC-certified wood from the UK.

Phil’s call to action is simple: Consider the many elements involved in the design and production of sustainable paper to ensure long-term sustainability of business and measurable environmental improvements based on science. “Pressuring the marketplace to use certain fiber types when it doesn’t make sense may not benefit the environment or the economy,” he says. I absolutely agree.

Only 10 percent of the world’s forests are certified so the growing convergence among certification programs is good news for responsible consumers. A recent UN market review says: “Over the years, many of the issues that previously divided the (certification) systems have become much less distinct.”

TerraChoice’s 2010 Sins of Greenwashing report includes certification labels like SFI, the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification on a limited list of “legitimate” environmental standards and certifications. It is just one of many respected organizations around the world that accept SFI as a legitimate certification standard.

This reality stands in sharp contrast to misinformation being disseminated by market campaigners. Their tactics mislead and confuse consumers, and do nothing to improve forest management. While SFI and FSC differ in approach and the level of depth assigned to different topics, one thing is for certain: both standards have led to improvements in forestry and conservation.

At SFI, we understand forest management demands a multi-faceted, science-based, and inclusive effort involving people from all walks of life. We have a forest standard with rigorous requirements, and we make sure program participants meet them. But we go a lot further – looking for ways to help our partners improve knowledge and practices related to forest management and procurement, and strengthen communities and build partnerships that support responsible forest management. This is the most honest approach, and it is the best way to benefit the environment AND our communities.  After all, isn’t that the point?

In Alabama, we take great pride in the fact that our implementation rate for best management practices stands at 97 percent. A recent review by the Southern Group of State Foresters Water Resources Committee said Alabama’s level of commitment to its BMP program can serve as an example for other states.

Much of this success can be traced to SFI third-party certification and the program’s commitment to improving practices, building knowledge and training logging professionals. This means a lot to me as State Forester and to people in communities across Alabama.

These facts are in sharp contrast to the misinformation disseminated by market campaigners. Groups like ForestEthics might claim to care about our forests but their tactics suggest otherwise.

Negative, misleading reports do nothing to improve forest management – and risk driving consumers to markets beyond our borders. That’s not good news in Alabama where forests not only support our second-largest manufacturing industry but also provide clean air and water, and habitat for hundreds of wildlife species.

You only have to look at the list of SFI board members to realize they represent environmental, social and economic interests equally, and honestly. And suggestions that the SFI audit process is not rigorous would be news to the independent certification bodies who verify that forest operations meet standard requirements – and are accountable to internationally recognized accreditation bodies.

Close to 2.4 million acres of Alabama’s forests are certified to the SFI Standard, and I see the benefits almost every day. And SFI’s reach goes far beyond certified lands – it addresses the reality that 80 percent of our 22.7 million acres of Alabama’s forests are owned by more than 440,000 non-industrial private landowners.

As one of the independent experts advising the SFI program, I have watched as SFI certification rightfully gained credibility and respect in the forest sector and in markets around the world. In my own state, the Alabama SFI Implementation Committee was awarded an achievement award last year for its outreach and training activities.

As a State Forester, I wish more organizations would follow SFI’s lead in raising awareness about the value of third-party forest certification, and inviting diverse partners to work with them. Encouraging consumers to buy products certified to all credible programs, which definitely includes SFI, is one of the best ways to make a difference in the forest and in the marketplace.

The latest is Green Building Council Italia, which signed a protocol agreement (here is a link to an English translation) with PEFC Italy to promote the benefits of forest certification and the use of certified wood products in the building sector. You may recall that at the start of 2010, the Green Building Council of Australia began to give equal consideration in its Green Star rating tool to forest certification standards accepted by the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) as well as FSC.

Italy and Australia join many respected green building rating systems that recognize certified wood as an excellent choice for green building. Others that offer credits for products certified to FSC, as well as PEFC-endorsed standards like SFI, include the ANSI/ICC 700-2008:National Green Building Standard, the ANSI-GBI 01-2010 Green Building Assessment Protocol for Commercial Buildings, Built Green Canada, Green Globes, CASBEE (Japan) and BREEAM (United Kingdom).

We are seeing growing evidence that there is widespread public and professional support for recognizing all credible forest certification standards – check out our newest fact sheet SFI: What Others are Saying. I am optimistic that this reality, when combined with the fact that U.S. Green Building Council members turned down a proposed LEED certification benchmark last year, means we can work with USGBC to find a way to recognize the value of wood and certification as a proof point of responsible forestry. You will find the latest news about USGBC, LEED and SFI on our update website.

Our partnerships with groups from Habitat for Humanity to Time Inc to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation have allowed us to get involved in so many projects we’re proud of. Partnerships are what breathe life into our program and drive the importance of what we do home for many people. When companies get involved with SFI, it means we’re able to continue work to make on-the-ground differences with logger training, conservation and community outreach. Additionally, it gives us a way to keep forests as forests, avoiding loss to conversion and development. To keep involvement with these programs, there must be a continuous demand for forest certification.

The packaging industry plays a large role in us being able to keep many of our partnerships running. Without their support, in addition to all the other users of certified forest products, not only would our forests suffer, but so would many of the programs we’re able to fund as a part of our program.

While forestry and the packaging industry have each made huge strides over the past two decades, there’s still a lot of work to be done. With only 10 percent of the world’s forests certified, the focus will always be on promoting responsible forestry on all lands – certified or uncertified. Additionally, we need more action to inform consumers and customers about forest certification and how it works in partnership with recycling. Recycling is important, but it, nor forest certification, can stand alone.

I had a great time talking with fellow speakers and attendees of the forum. With continued dialogue and continuous improvements, I can’t wait to see the leaps both sectors will make over the next 20 years.

For more coverage from the Sustainable Packaging Forum, check out this interview with Justmeans: