Publications

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
  • 06/13/2025 Foreword of the week
    The unlocked potential of carbon revenues to help fill the climate finance gap

    Climate negotiations are taking place next week in Bonn, with finance once again high on the agenda. COP 29 ended last year with a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) –revised climate finance target to replace the USD 100 billion goal. The NCQG decision put forward a commitment by developed countries to lead in providing USD 300 billion per year by 2035 for developing countries, as well as a proposal to work on a roadmap to scale up climate finance for developing countries to reach a level closer to the estimated needs –the ‘Baku to Belem Roadmap to 1.3T’ (USD 1.3 trillion). The latter must be delivered at the end of the year at COP 30, and strong efforts are being put in the task by the Brazilian Presidency.

  • 06/12/2025
    Six years of carbon certification in France: an assessment of the Label Bas-Carbone

    Six years after its inception, this study aims to review this mechanism and its projects: what activities are being implemented in the field, what impact are they having on the climate, with what robustness or, on the contrary, what limitations in terms of measurement, environmental integrity, accessibility, etc.? This exercise is also intended to feed into the process of continuous improvement of the scheme and to provide feedback for the current implementation of the European carbon certification framework (Carbon removals and carbon farming: CRCF).

  • 06/11/2025
    Global carbon accounts 2025

    This 2025 edition of the Global Carbon Accounts presents a landscape of carbon pricing instruments through the lens of their current and potential contribution to scale up climate and development finance. Several jurisdictions are already using carbon revenues to support a range of policy objectives, including decarbonization efforts and support for economic actors most affected by the transition. Yet there is still potential for them to further contribute to fill the gap.

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 !
Fermer