A second look at green certification.

Last month we published a report on green certification, an issue that is gradually working its way from the inner circles of trade associations, academia and a handful of pioneering companies to the outer rings of the wood products industry.

In a nutshell, green certification, known alternatively as green labeling, is a process through which timberlands are certified by an independent party as being harvested using sustainable forestry practices. Wood products manufacturers that purchase their raw materials from green certified sources and that subject their own businesses to a green certification audit, can ultimately earn the right to attach a green label to their product.

On the one hand, green certification is viewed as a proactive method of encouraging better forest management and sustainable development, while at the same time arming consumers with information for choosing "environmentally correct" products. On the other hand, as was noted in this space last month, there are critics who not only question the need for green certification programs in the first place, but perceive the process as a marketing ploy that will have little, if any, impact on sustainability and deforestation.

A matter of credibility

Eric Bloomquist, president of Colonial Craft, a millwork manufacturer based in St. Paul, Minn., and one of the green certification movement's pioneers, was featured in our first installment of EnviroTech last month. Bloomquist also spoke March 25 at the CWB Conference & Exhibition, at which time he asserted, "The general public does not believe industry is doing a credible job of forest management and sustainability .... As consumers we feel powerless as to where and how the woods we buy were forested. Green certification brings accountability into the process."

No doubt, there is a hardcore contigent of consumers who would rest easier knowing that their wooden bed frames were harvested from sustainable forests. Some of the important questions that remain unresolved, though, concern what criteria should be used to define and measure forest sustainability and what qualifications and guidelines should be required of certification agencies. These are serious questions made all the more difficult to answer because the wood products industry is highly fragmented.

At the very least, the issue of green certification has sparked a dialogue at all levels of industry that might help it reach a more clear-cut consensus on forest sustainment issues. Such a union will take on increased importance if and when the government - federal, state and local - takes a more active role in mandating sustainability. Thus, we applaud the Society of American Forestors for its recent appointment of a task force of forestry professionals to study the merits of green certification. Ultimately, we believe such a group should be expanded to include wood products manufacturers and retailers.

Green certification offers one possible path for industry to take the high ground in the public forestry debate. If there are better ways, let's hear about them.

|Green' program note

The pros and cons of green certification will be debated at a two-day conference scheduled for May 3 and 4 in Louisville, Ky. The program, "Sustainable Forest Management: Current Trends, Perspectives and Options for Lumber and Wood Products Manufacturers" is sponsored by Purdue University in cooperation with the National Hardwood Lumber Assn., the Hardwood Manufacturers Assn. and the Appalachian Hardwood Manufacturers Inc. For information, phone Dan Cassens at [phone] or Dawn Winterhalter at [phone].