Current status and experiences of co-operation and efforts towards mutual recognition PEFC/01-00-01 The PEFC Council Experience Presentation by Ben Gunneberg Secretary General FAO-GTZ-ITTO Seminar, Rome, Italy: 19/20 February 2001

Areas to be covered re PEFCC Mutual Recognition · How schemes are developed · How MR works - process and structures · Experiences and current status · Challenges for the future · Summary

Key points re PEFCC MR FRAMEWORK FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF COMPATIBLE NATIONAL FOREST CERTIFICATION SCHEMES and their mutual recognition USES EXISTING STUCTURES Eg certification bodies, national accreditation body & political processes developed by multi-stakeholder involvement REMAINS INDEPENDENT from Pan European Process, but uses the guidelines amongst other things as the reference for the establishment of national standards BOTTOM UP PROCESS in which independent national and regional schemes are developed by stakeholders at a national level STRUCTURE ENSURES DEMOCRATIC INPUT from each country and their stakeholders

Basis for Forest Certification Criteria

Continuous Process

Structure of PEFC as MR Process · Each country has a National Governing Body to which all stakeholders are invited to participate · Each country can apply to become a member of the PEFC Council and can submit its scheme(s) for assessment · Each country has votes according to FAO statistics · Countries vote in Council, as highest decision making body, including votes on endorsement of schemes · Countries elect Board, who appoints Secretariat.

Key Points · Schemes developed to common framework · Public consultation - while scheme developed - while scheme is being assessed internationally · Stakeholder involvement - in setting standards - in public consultation direct with consultant - in determining their country's vote on applicant scheme - through international organisational influence · Independent assessment - by expert consultants who take comments direct from public and members and their     stakeholders - forms basis on which countries can vote - informs independent peer review by countries

Experience and Current Status · 5 schemes endorsed Austria, Finland, Germany, Norway, Sweden · Account for 32.47 Million Hectares · 3 Schemes in pipeline Czech Republic, France, Latvia · 5 more schemes expected by end of 2001 Belgium, CSA (Canada), Portugal, Spain, Switzerland

Labelling Mechanism   Labelling mechanism now operational and available to those who require it covering: - National Schemes - Chain of Custodies

Challenges   · New schemes developed by other political processes interested in PEFC · Options being considered include colleges of political processes to expansion of current PEFC structure to accommodate new applicants · Need to ensure Quality of schemes, subsidiarity principle and use of existing structures

Summary of Key Issues · Must be based on existing and normal procedures eg Processes for standard setting; national accreditation bodies and certification bodies · Bottom up approach which is voluntary, inclusive, transparent and respects subsidiarity · Non discriminatory and democratic process · Processes which are : Transparent Credible Accountable Non-Discriminatory Accessible to all Cost effective · Label providers must be independent of accreditation and certification bodies and should be owned by members schemes to ensure no undue influence.

Conclusions PEFC · Respects political processes supported by multi-stakeholder involvement · Provides bottom up process for MR · Relies on normal accreditation and certification procedures · Delivers certified products to the market · Will work with others to develop the MR framework to accommodate other processes · Has endorsed 5 schemes, 3 in pipeline and 5 more expected by end 2001 · Encourages all those who have not yet done so to get actively involved.