how wood from deforestation still ends up in commerce

Officially, timber from illegal deforestation is prohibited from export to Europe or the United States. But while the One Forest Summit is taking place in Gabon, Radio France’s investigation unit with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (Icij) and 38 media partners, reveal that certification bodies are still validating products related to deforestation or logging in conflict zones.

INQUIRY >> “Deforestation Inc”: behind two French pulp mills, an Indonesian group involved in deforestation

After nine months of investigation called “Deforestation Inc”, we were able to establish that we find illegal teak on the decks of French yachts, in high-end furniture and in many other products, including coffins. By activating a network of 140 journalists, we were able to examine data relating to logging companies in 50 countries and we identified 347 companies that were able to have their timber declared as sustainable when it was not. In total, we have identified more than 1,400 false statements about the origin of wood. An eloquent figure, and yet still very much below reality.

Main responsible for this situation: unscrupulous foresters and states, but also the current certification system. In particular, we noted that a company manufacturing wood products in the Amazon was able to be certified even though it had been sentenced to 37 fines since 1998 for having stored and transported prohibited wood. In Chile, a Japanese forestry company was able to buy from suppliers who lied in documents about the origin of the wood. A group of Canadian logging companies were even able to get a “sustainable forest management plan” certified by a local body, when they planned to cut trees on native forest land. And France is also concerned. “A felled tree cannot be replaced in a man’s lifetime”however, recently recalled a French prosecutor in a case involving a Spanish logging company that had illegally cut down century-old oaks and other trees in private forests in Ariège.

“The system is not working”

This observation raises all the more questions as the industrial exploitation of primary forests is one of the main causes of climate change, as we can still see at the Libreville summit. Scientists estimate that it accounts for more than 10% in greenhouse gas emissions. The destruction of forests also aggravates flooding, contributes to the disappearance of fauna and flora, and, according to some scientists, to an upsurge in infectious diseases in humans. With the disappearance of trees, certain insects carrying pathogens migrate to plants consumed by farm animals, which end up in the food chain.

“It’s the whole system on which we rely that does not work”, believes Grégoire Jacob, French forestry consultant for private companies. The certifiers, whose booming sector represents ten billion dollars, are however rarely called into question when they do not point out the questionable nature of the origin of the wood of their customers. While financial audits respond to very codified rules, environmental audits are much more flexible, and therefore much more lax. According to Jonathan White, a Client Earth lawyer specializing in corporate liability and climate risk: “They are insufficiently regulated. They should be more rigorous and not content with the information that companies provide to them.”

Abusive certifications

What is at issue is a so-called “voluntary” certification system that has been in place over the past two decades. It makes it possible to issue a kind of certificate of good environmental conduct, very popular today by many companies. In 2007, the American publisher of JK Rowling, for example, requested that FSC-certified paper be used for its novel Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. This type of label is issued by international organizations such as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), the Program for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) and the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO).

But to obtain it, the company that buys or sells wooden products will ask an intermediary company to audit it. This is where audit giants like KPMG and PwC, the Swiss multinational Société Générale de Surveillance SA (SGS), and even smaller companies like PT Inti multima sertifikasi in Indonesia come in. These firms carry out risk assessments. They inspect factories, interview foresters and ensure that practices and products meet environmental standards. Some documents from their cabinets pride themselves on wanting to “protect the planet’s forests”, promote “the economically viable exploitation of forests” or even “reduce deforestation”. They are the ones who then send their file to the certifier who issues the FSC sustainable label, or another.

Certified sustainable “blood” wood

But in many cases, companies obtain their certification abusively. The firm that carries out the audits being paid by its client, it is often not very attentive. For example, in the United States, Italy and New Zealand, manufacturers of boat decks and timber traders continue to promote their green labels, while illegally importing teak from Burma. In this country, however, the trade in natural resources finances the junta which overthrew the democratically elected government in 2021.

Among the abuses we have identified, we find that in Finland, certifiers did not mention in their reports that the courts had sentenced two labeled forestry companies to fines for having felled trees in protected areas. In Indonesia, home to one of the world’s largest exporters of tropical timber, ecologists from the Bogor City-based Independent Forest Monitoring Network have found that over the past decade auditing firms have ignored environmental violations committed by at least 160 companies. Tempo, an Indonesian magazine partner of Icij, also found that in many of these cases, once notified, certifiers did not ask their client to take corrective action to address these violations. This laissez-faire allowed Indonesian companies to obtain export licenses to Europe in particular.

A label that is not a guarantee

Since the 1990s, the FSC and PEFC standards have been the most reputable in the world. Consumers can find their logos on a variety of items, from notebooks to candy wrappers to paper cups to furniture sold on Amazon. But in recent years, the reputation of these two organizations has been tarnished. Overwhelmed by demand, they have relaxed their criteria. The validation process has become less strict. “Many consumers are reassured if they see a green label on a product in a grocery store.says Bob Bancroft, a former forest auditor from Nova Scotia in Canada. They have peace of mind buying it.” But in many cases, this label is no longer a guarantee. In an interview with our German colleague WDR, FSC general manager Kim Carstensen says he respects “strict environmental rules”but recognizes: “We are not in an ideal world.” As’“voluntary tool”FSC “does not claim to be able to solve deforestation on its own”.

Stricter legislation in Europe?

This is why the European Commission is considering adopting new legislation. It plans to impose “effective, proportionate and dissuasive” penalties on companies that make environmental claims that are not substantiated by evidence. The authorities would rely on “independent verifiers” to demonstrate that the companies’ statements are real. In Europe, failing certifiers could therefore soon be placed in the spotlight. For Grant Rosoman, senior adviser to Greenpeace International specializing in forestry issues, it was time. “They are one of the biggest parts of the problemhe says. Their ineffectiveness allows deforestation, human rights abuses and illegalities to continue.” An observation that our investigation, unfortunately, seems to validate.

Alert the Radio France investigation unit: to send information to Radio France’s investigation unit anonymously and securely, you can now click on alerter.radiofrance.fr