-
Spain:
The NORFOR/ENCE certification, yet another FSC fraud
The pulp and paper
company ENCE owns monoculture eucalyptus plantations in Spain
and Uruguay, certified by FSC. Part of these plantations, some
12,000 hectares spread out among over 200 plots, are located in
the Northeast of Spain (Galicia, Asturias and Cantabria) and are
managed by one of its forestry subsidiary companies, NORFOR.
Eucalyptus cultivation
has been practiced in Galicia on a large scale from the fifties
onwards and has increased since ENCE started producing pulp exclusively
from eucalyptus wood. Today, the destructive potential associated
with this crop can be noted, having been one of the main agents
in the proliferation of forest fires, erosion and soil degradation,
impoverishment of rural communities, low wages in forestry, loss
of diversity and in wide areas the virtual disappearance of the
ecological and cultural landscape. The state of degradation
reached in the plantations is leading the administrations to design
policies aimed at controlling this species and substituting it
with other more profitable and better adapted trees.
NORFOR’s forestry
activities have been characterized by the use of very intensive
and aggressive plantation practices as regards to their consequences
on biological systems supporting production. Additionally, in
the economic context, the company’s activities have had negative
consequences as it is the main buyer of eucalyptus timber in Galicia,
thus acting as a monopoly and causing prices to collapse. Socially
the company’s activities have also had negative impacts, such
as the impossibility of obtaining other forest produce due to
the aggressive cultivation techniques which imply uncontrolled
use of agrochemicals such as weed-killers, fungicides and insecticides,
that lead to the elimination of a large number of organisms that
would make bee-keeping, hunting, mushroom gathering or cattle-raising
possible.
In September 2004,
following an audit carried out by SGS -which was documented in
an amazing public summary- NORFOR was granted FSC certification.
This certification was questioned by Greenpeace, WWF and the Pontevedran
Pola Defensa da Ría Association, supported by the ecological movement
as a whole. This questioning highlights, with evidence, the company’s
lack of compliance with the majority of FSC’s principles and criteria.
However, the lack of sensitivity on the part of SGS, NORFOR and
FSC itself was total and in spite of the fact that SGS had no
option but to admit to the content of some of the complaints,
the certificate was upheld.
Finally, after three
years of complaints, FSC’s Accreditation Services International
(ASI) decided to carry out a follow-up audit on SGS, the company
having granted certification. In principle the auditing had been
programmed to study the controversial aspects of certification
and thus respond to the complaints that had been submitted and
maintained. The field audit took place at the end of May
2007 and included a brief meeting with the ecologist groups at
the beginning of June. During this meeting, the ASI members declared
that they had prepared and carried out the field audit without
having read the contents of the complaints sent by APDR (Asociación
pola defensa da Ría). Thus it became clear that the auditors were
unaware of the facts and evidence contained in the complaints
and that there had been no intention of finding out if
these were true regarding NORFOR’s forestry
management.
As expected, the
auditors’ report was of very poor quality and doubtful honesty
and only included a few of the
cases of lack of compliance with standards,
that had been highlighted in the claims against this certification.
The report does not analyse indicators regarding compliance with
Spanish standards, resolves Major Non-compliance with Principles
with Requests for Minor Corrective Action, minimizes the effects
of NORFOR’s poor practices and indicates that SGS has carried
out a “professional” auditing process. Even so, ASI decided to
maintain recognition of SGS as a certifying body and to uphold
the company’s certification.
The conclusion to
be reached is that FSC, having had the opportunity to check the
negative aspects of NORFOR’s forestry management, has decided
-by maintaining its certification- to take a further step along
the road to fraud. FSC’s ASI has not been willing to analyse
the points contained in the complaints in order to avoid having
to cancel the certification of this company and to withdraw its
recognition of SGS as a certifying body.
This lack of interest
shown by FSC in checking compliance with its own standards, as
well as the large number of certified companies denounced by ecologist
and human rights movements all over the world, is indicative that
those presently responsible for FSC have taken up the position
of emptying certification of content and certifying without considering
compliance with standards. The company does not even show any
interest in improving its management system. Presently NORFOR’s
plots show the same signs of degradation, they occupy protected
ecosystems to plant eucalyptus monocultures, make massive use
of agrochemicals, conceal the situation of certified plots and
do not comply with most of the certification standards.
In view of this situation
it is necessary to bring to the attention of citizens and administrations
the fraud concealed behind many of FSC’s products, warning that
behind the seal there may be poor forestry management, much more
likely if the timber comes from monoculture plantations
and that it is possible that the “green seal” conceals an activity
that is seriously damaging at the environmental, economic and
social levels, as is the case with products made from NORFOR’s
eucalyptus timber. Consumers must know that FSC certification
is being granted without this implying the promotion of environmentally
responsible, socially beneficial and economically viable forest
management.
By Benito Andrade, Asociación Pola Defensa
Da Ría (APDR), e-mail:
apdr@apdr.info,
www.apdr.info