I was impressed with a recent article by Robert Cassidy, Editor-in-Chief of Building Design & Construction called End the Battle of FSC vs. SFI Wood in LEED. It captures concisely the inconsistencies the recent draft of LEED 2012 has, as well as the continuous unfair treatment wood receives over other building materials such as cement and steel.

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

I recently talked to Kenneth Norris, Contributing Editor of Pulp & Paper International, about the latest SFI Progress Report, and was pleased to see a wonderful account of our discussion in RISI. The article, Good forest management much more than certification, not only did a great job of capturing the reasons behind the SFI program’s “bigger picture” approach to third-party forest certification; but also encouraged readers to consider some of the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for forest certification programs. At SFI, the bigger picture means integrity in the work we do; supporting communities and conservation initiatives, and promoting responsible forest management across the supply chain.

I told RISI that while I’m proud of the growth of our program over the past years, our real success comes from what we are able to achieve with our many partners – including conservation groups, public agencies, academics and community organizations.

The RISI article also points to the importance of having a choice of certification standards. A healthy competitive environment makes us all better – and that’s great for forests, for communities and for the marketplace. It will help us address what is becoming an even more complex landscape with changes in everything from climate to land ownership demands to business contexts.

I would encourage you to read the RISI post, and I welcome your thoughts.

Posted by Ben Silvernail, SFI Intern

The 2010 National Report on Sustainable Forests was recently released, providing an excellent resource for current data and analysis from the US Forest Service. The content of the report is structured around the Montreal Process Criteria and Indicators for Forest Sustainability (MPC&I), which provide a comprehensive framework to assess and describe forest trends related to the ecological, social, and economic aspects of sustainability. The Canadian and U.S. governments are signatories to the Montréal Process, and the MP C&I are reflected in the SFI 2010-2014 Standard’s principles, objectives, performance measures, and indicators.

The review process of the report was organized by the Roundtable on Sustainable Forests, which includes organizations, such as SFI Inc., who are committed to responsible, long-term forest management. The insight and information included in this report should help analysts, land managers, and policy-makers address prevailing and increasingly complex issues surrounding long-term sustainability goals, such as the evolving relationship between forests, climate change, and bioenergy.

The 2010 report highlights several areas where the SFI program is helping to improve forest health and knowledge through its standard. The report’s assessment of Indicator 7.60, regarding the capacity to conduct and apply research and development aimed at improving forest management and delivery of forest goods and services, acknowledges that “forest certification standards, particularly the Sustainable Forestry Initiative, require demonstration of research.” This is excellent recognition of SFI’s contribution to research, including the $1.2 billion that SFI program participants have invested in research since 1995, and our Conservation and Community Partnerships Grants Program launched in 2010 that has provided over $1 million to date to improve forest management in the United States and Canada and responsible procurement globally.

The report also brings attention to the fact that forest certification systems provide a clear means to demonstrate that private and public forestry organizations conform to Best Management Practices, and also work as a market based mechanism to protect special sites.

While the report is national in scale, its success ultimately depends on action and innovation at all scales – national, state, and local – and coordination with those who may not traditionally be a part of the forestry community.  At SFI, we look forward to continuing to work with all our partners and all who care about our forests and this report lays the groundwork for us all to better understand and enhance forest health and productivity.

Posted by Ben Silvernail, SFI Intern

I am excited to be living in Washington, DC for the summer as a student of environmental studies and an intern with the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI). A combination of factors led me here, including my work researching how timber harvest management practices affect certain avian species of conservation interest, as well as a great appreciation for natural resources and the outdoors. I have always looked to nature for inspiration and recreation, and working with SFI this summer will provide a great opportunity to learn more about how public policy regarding sustainability is created, adopted and affected.

I was led to my internship at SFI through faculty at Michigan State University, where I have spent the last three years focusing on environmental science and policy, as well as geographic information science. Prior to my arrival in DC, I worked on public lands as a member of the Michigan Civilian Conservation Corps, had a legislative internship with the Michigan House of Representatives, worked as a subcontractor installing office furniture, and most recently had a job with the MSU Center for Spatial Analysis of Recreation and Tourism.

Responsible forest management is important to me because it touches so many aspects of daily life. We all need clean water and air, and I personally love to get outdoors to go camping, fishing, and hiking. I am also impressed by the work SFI is doing to support communities, to work with conservation groups across the continent to better understand and protect a variety of forest ecosystems, and to work with aboriginal communities. I’m proud to work with and learn more about an organization that is so committed to our forests, our communities, consumers, and customers, and to addressing some of the global challenges and opportunities facing forestry.

Posted by Allison Welde, SFI Director of Conservation Partnerships and Communications

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.