4.3 Article

Cost analysis of FSC forest certification and opportunities to cover the costs a case study of Quang Tri FSC group in Central Vietnam

Journal

JOURNAL OF FOREST RESEARCH
Volume 24, Issue 3, Pages 137-142

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13416979.2019.1610993

Keywords

Forest certification; FSC; smallscale forestry; household forestry; sustainable forest management

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the last decade, the forest certification has expanded in Vietnam as an effort of the Government to boost the supply of certified wood for furniture production. However, the certification creates many challenges to the many small woodlot owners. Some of the challenges consist of a lack of technical knowledge and skills, as well as the high cost of the certification process. In this study, we identify the actual economic costs of obtaining and maintaining FSC certification and discuss some mechanism which can support small-scale forest owners paying for these costs. The results reveal that the audit fee paying to the certification agency accounts for a big proportion of total costs. On one hand, the result of our Benefit Cost analysis confirms that the revenue of selling FSC certified timber is much higher than non-certified, implying that the forest owners earn from certification and therefore, are capable of paying for costs associated with forest certification by themselves. In order to obtain higher revenue, a longer forest rotation is suggested. However, the lengthened years also cause difficulties and risks to the local people's livelihood, which therefore, requires decreasing the certification cost per ha by larger scale of certified forest area or number of members. As the first group of smallholders in Vietnam obtaining the FSC certificate, the findings from this study are important towards the management and development of forest certification in Vietnam.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available