Report: Forest Certification Schemes Create 'Perverse Incentives'
Raises costs, harms ecosystems
Environmental activists who say they support strong, healthy forests actually are pushing an agenda that would undermine the timber industry, enrich special interests and burden the sensitive habitats they claim to champion.
That's the key finding of a new report George Mason University has authored in partnership with Forisk Consulting, an organization that tracks financial impacts on forestry operations.
At issue is the forest certification process, a concept that was introduced during the 1992 United Nations Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro as a subset of "sustainable development." To become certified, forest managers must work to ensure that trees are harvested in an environmentally sound manner with minimal ecological impacts.
Hide Comments (0)
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post commentsMute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?