Building synergies between sustainable forest management certification and carbon certification: what bases are there and for what impact?

5 July 2018 - Climate Report - By : / Valentin BELLASSEN / Cyril BRULEZ

What is carbon certification for a forestry project? What is the difference with sustainability certification? How do these different frameworks interact and what synergies can be built?

Coming from the work of the Club Carbone Forêt Bois, led by I4CE, this study answers these various questions by presenting the characteristics and issues related to sustainable management certifications (e.g. PEFC and FSC) and carbon certifications (e.g. VCS (now Verra), Gold Standard, etc.).

A certification framework aims to overcome information asymmetry between producers and consumers of services or goods, by offering guaranteed information on the production chain.

In the case of a company wishing to offset part of its emissions, carbon offset standards guarantee the sequestration service rendered by a forest and attributable to the forest manager. In the case of the purchase of a wood product, sustainable forest management labels attest to the respect of social and environmental criteria in forest management and wood processing.

 The area under certified sustainable forest management is modest worldwide (about 10%) but represents 15 times the forest area engaged in certified carbon offset projects. These two types of certification have different objectives but often promote similar silvicultural practices and the types of stakeholders, forest manager, State, auditor, NGO, etc. involved in both frameworks overlap quite widely.

While both types of certification aim to promote better forest management, their objectives and the indicators taken into account differ :

  • Carbon certification estimates precisely the carbon gain and especially its additionality, i.e. the absence of windfall effect.
  • Sustainable management certification does not certify these two points but attests to the implementation of environmentally friendly practices and a continuous improvement approach to forest management.

These differences impact the elements audited to obtain certification.

The economic incentive given by the two types of certification is also different: premium on the selling price of wood on the one hand and revenue generated by the sale of carbon credits on the other. The costs associated with carbon certification are also higher than those associated with sustainable management certification, but it also allows the owner to generate much higher and earlier revenues as soon as the sale of carbon credits begins.

Currently, few concrete links exist between the two types of certification, even though their scope is becoming more uniform and closer connections are developing: for example, the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) submitted guidelines in 2017 to “demonstrate the impact of forest management on ecosystem services“, including carbon, while carbon certification standards such as the Gold Standard allow dual certification with the FSC to demonstrate compliance with different sustainable management criteria.

The implementation of joint audits is an option for reducing certification costs often mentioned, but the gain in time is limited around 20%, according to experience with dual certification in agriculture.



Building synergies between sustainable forest management certification and carbon certification: what bases are there and for what impact? Download
To learn more
  • 02/29/2024 Blog post
    European certification framework: a high-quality outline that does not guarantee the value of the final picture

    The European co-legislators have just reached an agreement on the content of the future European Carbon Removal Certification Framework (CRCF). Negotiations were swift and fruitful, against a backdrop of a general step back in the adoption of the various Green Deal texts. While today sees environmental issues played off against farmer’s livelihoods, this draft regulation brings these two elements together to create the conditions for investment in the transition of agriculture and forestry sectors. However, several details still need to be clarified to ensure that this framework actually enables effective and ambitious climate financing.

  • 02/23/2024 Foreword of the week
    European climate investments must double to hit 2030 EU targets

    This week, I4CE launches the first European Climate Investment Deficit report. During a year’s research, we analysed investments in 22 sectors of the EU27 economy that are critical for the EU to deliver its 2030 climate and energy security objectives. The European Green Deal is gaining economic momentum, as climate investments in the EU grew 9% in 2022, reaching […]

  • 02/21/2024
    European Climate Investment Deficit report: an investment pathway for Europe’s future

    Climate investments in the EU economy grew by 9% in 2022. This report finds that the European Green Deal is gaining economic momentum but investments in modernising energy, transport, and buildings must still double for the EU to hit 2030 climate targets.

See all publications
Press contact Amélie FRITZ Head of Communication and press relations Email
Subscribe to our mailing list :
I register !
Subscribe to our newsletter
Once a week, receive all the information on climate economics
I register !