Funded by Ford Foundation

International Network for Bamboo and Rattan

December 18, 2007

 

1.      Literature review and desk study have been done in 2006 and a position paper and proposal - Safeguarding Sustainable Bamboo Management- A Discussion of Problems and Potential Solutions, Including the Certification Instrument, has been developed by Mr. Jens Altmann and Anke Schaffartzik under the project. It is a periodic report and output of the project by 2006.

2.      Multi-stakeholder surveys have been done in 2006 and 2007, focusing on bamboo flooring industry in Zhejiang and Hunan provinces. Preliminary situation reflecting the producers to bamboo certification is analyzed and reported.

3.      A survey work in UK about the consumers’ reaction to certified bamboo flooring products from China has been done in March – April 2007 in UN Market by Kethleen Beckinghum, the INBAR collaborator on the project at Edinburgh University, UK.

4.      Two internal brainstorming workshops have been held in 2006 and 2007 to discuss the bamboo certification matter.

5.      A workshop, in collaboration with ICBR and CAF, on feasibility study was held on Nov. 30, 2007, with participation of main stakeholders related to bamboo management, processing and market. A group will be teamed up to develop the standards of sustainable management of bamboo forests.

6.      A final report on the feasibility study of bamboo certification was being finalized and available in December 2007.

 

Representatives of this workshop cover almost all the relevant stakeholders of bamboo forest certification, which fully reflect the understanding and views of bamboo forest certification from each aspect. Based on the abundant consultation and exchange information of relevant stakeholders, this workshop successfully achieved the expected goals. The main conclusions and recommendations of the workshop are as follows:

1.     Bamboo forest managers and researchers should take seriously the issue of bamboo forest sustainable management, and should develop perspective and awareness of hardship of the sustainable management of bamboo and international trading of Chinese bamboo products. Bamboo unlike the wood timber, is a non-timber forest products containing the feature of natural fast regeneration, which makes its management sustainable. Meanwhile, more concerns and studies should be addressed to the impact of mono-cultured bamboo management on biodiversity, as well as environmental pollution caused by bamboo product processing, especially some plastic mixture.

2.     The fundamental technical conditions for bamboo forest certification, as well as  domestic and abroad market environment are not matured at the current stage in China. The timing and conditions were not yet ready for the government and related institutions to promote comprehensively bamboo forest sustainable management certification in China. However, for a further exploration of the feasibility of certification and approach of the contribution of bamboo forest certification on bamboo forest sustainable management, as well as the result of the certification, demonstration trails of bamboo forest certification in small scales can be undertaken to provide scientific and technical support. The overall promotion of bamboo certification has to suspend till the market improved and matured.

3.     To promote and guide the sustainable management of bamboo forest and improve the management standard, standard criteria and indicator system for bamboo forest sustainable management should be enacted as soon as possible, which could provide the basis for the bamboo forest certification in the future if needed.

4.     In order to further propagate and strengthen the publicity and information exchange,  the following contents should be noticed: 1) the difference of management and production characteristics of bamboo timber with wood; 2) bamboo products is an excellent replacement of wood, and the promotion of "bamboo substituting wood"; 3) strengthening the training and public awareness of bamboo forest sustainable management practice from the state governmental departments to the fundamental bamboo farmers;

5.     To promote and reinforce the capacity-building of the forestry debarments and local rural area, including the nursing management, processing, utilization and certification of the resources.

 

1.       The study has shown that bamboo certification is challenging but feasible. Three areas of focus need to be addressed: biodiversity conservation, life cycle analysis (LCA), and poverty alleviation. FSC SLIMF has already been piloted in Columbia for bamboo, and INBAR Ecuador is currently developing a national bamboo certification scheme. Although FSC is far from an ideal option for bamboo, the principles and criteria provide suitable generic guidelines for sustainable management. FSC provides an existing system that can be utilised to save logistical and marketing issues inherent in establishing an INBAR brand label.

2.       The market demand for bamboo certification is unclear. Bamboo is currently marketed as an environmentally friendly product, benefiting from the market for alternative resources to tropical timber. Consumers and retailers alike are unaware of sustainability issues in the industry. Currently USGBC affords bamboo extra green credits for being a Rapidly Renewable Resource regardless of its origin. Prominent UK retailers have expressed interest in certified bamboo, as the inherently green label comes under question. As with the establishment of FSC, both drivers from within the industry and prominent NGOs are required to provide awareness and a sense of urgency within the public sphere to inform consumers of SBM.

3.       A motion recognising bamboo as unique from other NTFPs and timber was passed in 2005, yet since then little action has been taken for the recognition of this category. There is division over the need for re-categorisation of bamboo; however there is agreement that INBAR, as the global experts of bamboo and rattan, should use their influence to advocate for enabling environments for bamboo farmers. A network approach to policy, involving all stakeholders from the outset, should be adopted placing emphasis on South-South learning through bamboo best practice exchange.

4.       Capacity building at a livelihoods level is the first course of action needed. Micro-level knowledge of the value chain and existing cooperatives need to be established to build on existing knowledge and networks. Farmers value their autonomy as their source of daily happiness, indicating the need for enabling environments through experienced auditors and capacity building programmes for group schemes. INBAR can initiate global dialogue to support research into certification, promoting equity in development by assisting other countries as well as China to achieve a coordinated response to global SBM.

5.       This study raises wider issues beyond the confines of bamboo certification: entering certification schemes and adopting practices to suit new materials is prohibiting since they have evolved from Northern agendas. FSC SLIMF is not an accessible mechanism for smallholders. It exists as a hybrid model designed for large Northern based multinationals, whereby the producer can afford to bare the cost of certification. It must be recognised therefore that with FSC Small and Low Intensively Managed Forests, ‘low intensity’ is not synonymous with ‘low capacity.’ FSC SLIMF is not a tool to eradicate poverty therefore bamboo farmers need to be provided with realistic expectations of the scheme and form an integral part of the decision making process. Research by IIED into a Fairtrade-FSC certification seeks to provide a mechanism that addresses issues of both poverty alleviation and environmental sustainability, although no agreement amongst the brands has been reached. This would provide a more financially accessible model for SFEs with possible entry points for bamboo. Although increasing opportunities for entry and synergy amongst labels exist, processes are complex and inhibitive for SFEs.

6.       Consumers occupying the ‘green’ market, seeking to make sustainable choices are the same ones imposing Northern focused environmental criteria and a subsequent social engineering burden on Southern producers. The dominance of FSC is leading to NTFPs like bamboo to have to compete directly with large FSC certified timber companies. Proliferation of standards is causing confusion in the marketplace, threatening the validity of all labelling systems. Cashore (2007) aims to bridge the proliferation and marketing divide by producing a recognisable umbrella Better World label. Still, in order to have market positioning, labels cannot seek to be all encompassing, leading to no labels currently addressing both forestry and LCA issues, although USGBC acknowledges this void and endeavours to find solutions. WWF promotes both FSC and Ecological Footprints, even though significant discrepancies exist within the two systems, suggesting a lack of holism currently existing within the public environmental sphere.