Future of the FSC: What Happens When Manufacturers Reject Certification? Sustainability Lessons from ArchitectureBoston Expo (ABX)
Last month, we headed out to ArchitectureBoston Expo (ABX) to get the pulse on sustainability from the perspective of architects, engineers, builders, contractors, manufacturers, and other AEC professionals. We spoke to dozens of representatives from the more than 400 exhibitors about sustainability programs, sustainability strategy, and what they think of it all.
Our conversations resulted in two really great questions:
- Are Architects Hurting Manufacturers’ Sustainability Progress?
- Future of the FSC: What Happens When Manufacturers Reject Certification?
Additionally, we took extra time and conducted a survey specifically targeted at companies that manufacture products (as opposed to service providers and distributors) used in the AEC field to delve deeper into what types of companies are doing what types of sustainability programs and why. Come back on Thursday to see what we’ve learned!
Future of the FSC: What Happens When Manufacturers Reject Certification?
Many of the manufacturing companies we spoke with manufactured some sort of wood product for the built space. Either importing wood from other continents or harvesting here in the United States and Canada, almost all of them said that they were “FSC Certified.”
But there’s a catch.
Nearly all of the company representatives, once they understood we weren’t potential clients and we just wanted to discuss sustainability certifications, immediately had a lot more to say.
One of the company representatives said, “We’re not renewing our FSC certification next year.”
Another said, “Yeah, we are FSC Certified, but we really don’t need to be.”
Another said, “I just don’t think FSC Certification is going to be around in a couple of years. We’re spending money on something to put on our labels or our website that fundamentally doesn’t change how we manage the forests we harvest from anyway.”
His point, like many was that most FSC Certified and non-FSC certified companies selling (specifically) hardwood products understand that sustainable forest management is the only way to not drive yourself out of business.
They have to manage the forest well. Replant. Use every bit of byproduct to maximize efficiency and profits. And the FSC Certification doesn’t change any of that, it just costs money to certify to doing something they would do regardless. Most companies in this industry sector must demonstrating best practice so they go out of business like the Once-ler and his Truffula trees.
What’s next for wood?
It will be interesting to see if the FSC Certification does fade away, but what will be more interesting is to see what’s next in the cutting-edge of sustainability from the wood products segment. Is importing South American hardwood or South African hardwood preferable to a material that is made from North American hardwood (assuming we live in North America)? Are there going to be wood substitutes that are more sustainable to manufacture from a life-cycle perspective? What metric does the FSC Certification miss that can actually demonstrate how different wood products companies are impacting the environment?
If the FSC is out, then something else needs to step in
Wood, in and of itself, isn’t a “renewable resource.” Active forestry management practices need to be in place to “renew” the resource, and there is always room for improvement.
Are you in the wood products industry and are thinking of giving up on FSC Certification? Tell us why in the comments.
Check back for Part 3 in our ABX series in January: What should your manufacturing company be doing right now to improve environmental and social impact?