In light of recent developments involving participants within the FSC system in the Tairawhiti region, FSC Australia and New Zealand (FSC ANZ) is issuing this statement to offer clarity on the functionality of and roles within our system.
The FSC certification system requires the support of several third-party actors to operate it on the ground and to maintain independence and integrity. FSC’s primary role is to set best-practice forest management standards. These standards are then put into practice by forest managers. Forest managers’ adherence to the standards is audited by FSC-accredited certification bodies. Assurance Services International (ASI), FSC’s assurance partner, accredits certification bodies against FSC’s standards, oversees their performance, and investigates any concerns raised by stakeholders regarding the adequacy of their certification decisions.
As the oversight body of FSC’s certification system, ASI undertook compliance assessments in late 2023 of two FSC-accredited certification bodies and their decision-making regarding two of the certification bodies’ clients; SGS as the certification body for Ernslaw One Limited and Preferred by Nature (formerly Nepcon) as the certification body for PF Olsen.
ASI operates independently of FSC, and FSC does not direct ASI to undertake assessments. When and where assessments occur is solely the decision of ASI. Further, FSC is not informed about the outcome of assessments and we, therefore, encourage interested stakeholders to direct any queries regarding the outcome of the assessments to ASI and/or the certification bodies.
FSC ANZ does, however, understand that the summary reports of ASI’s assessments in the Tairawhiti region will be made available on ASI’s webpage in the near future and encourage interested stakeholders to keep an eye out for the reports here.
Where nonconformities are issued to certification bodies by ASI, the certification body is required to undertake a root cause analysis to identify the underlying causes of the nonconformities and to put in place appropriate measures to correct the issue that caused the nonconformity in the first place.
Nonconformities may under some circumstances lead to the suspension of a certification body. On its webpage, ASI explains i) what happens when a certification body (referred to as ‘conformity assessment body’ in ASI’s terminology) is suspended, ii) which activities it can and cannot carry out during the suspension, and iii) what happens if the root causes are not addressed within the provided timeframe.
Further, as the standard-setting body, FSC ANZ is not informed of the rationale behind the suspension of FSC certificate holders or certification bodies. Any inquiries about suspensions should, therefore, be directed to the suspended certificate holder and/or their certification body.
The suspension of an FSC certificate means that the certificate is temporarily invalidated, and the certificate holder is unable to claim their products as FSC. Where the nonconformity that prompted the suspension is addressed within a given timeframe (typically three months), the suspension is lifted. Conversely, a failure to address the nonconformity within the provided timeframe typically leads to a termination of the certificate.
For any questions, contact FSC ANZ Communications and Engagement Manager, Sarah Day, at s.day@au.fsc.org