|
|
The Finnish Forest Research
Institute predicts that
roundwood imports to Finland
will rise to over 19 million
cubic meters in 2005 and over
20 million in 2006.
The Finnish Forest Research
Institute estimates that
roundwood imports to Finland
will reach their highest point
this year. New sawmills in
Russia are expected to
decrease the volume of logs
available for import to
Finland by 2006. On the other
hand, this will increase the
imports of wood chips. From
January to July 2005, chip
imports to Finland grew by 37
percent compared to the
previous year.
Pulp wood imports show no
signs of decreasing. At the
beginning of the year softwood
imports rose by 65 percent
from 2004, reveals the
recently published Finnish
Forest Sector Economic Outlook
by the Finnish Forest Research
Institute. At the same time
the import prices of pine and
spruce pulpwood rose by 13 and
eight percent, respectively.
However, most of the pulpwood
imported to Finland is birch,
and the import price of
hardwood pulpwood, which also
includes aspen, fell slightly.
Almost 90 percent of the
roundwood imported to Finland
comes from Russia and the
Baltic republics.
Fellings in Finland dropped
slightly
The growing volume of imported
roundwood means that it makes
up about quarter of the volume
of roundwood used by the
Finnish forest industry.
Commercial fellings in Finland
have decreased slightly in
2005 compared to 2004.
According to the Finnish
Forest Research Institute,
fellings in January–October
were four percent smaller than
in 2004. The price of spruce
logs dropped by 11 percent
compared to 2004.
WWF doubts the origins of
imports
WWF estimates that as much as
one fourth of the wood
imported from Russia and the
Baltic States to Finland could
be illegal in one way or
another. Mr.
Harri Karjalainen,
head of WWF Finland’s forest
programme, says that these
estimates are based on
official Russian statistics.
For instance, some 27 percent
more wood appears to be used
in or exported from Southwest
Russia than is felled or
imported there.
“The question is not whether
there’s illegal logging but
how extensive it is. The
somewhat more conservative
estimate of the European
Forest Institute is 10-15
percent.”
The fact that Russians measure
roundwood volumes under bark
and Finns over bark makes a
15-percent difference in the
statistics between the two
countries.
“More transparency needed in
tracing systems”
WWF has criticised the systems
used by forest companies in
tracing the origins of wood
for not being transparent
enough. Mr. Karjalainen says
that WWF does not ask any
business secrets to be
revealed. “We want the
companies to say how they
define illegal loggings, how
the definition affects the
criteria used in tracing the
origins and how the system of
tracing wood origins works.”
”Since the companies claim
that their systems prevent the
use of illegal wood, they have
to prove it. We need to see
the criteria and the auditing
reports of the systems. None
of the companies is
transparent enough.”
“Third-party verification is
enough”
The forest industry thinks
that one way of responding to
WWF’s demands is the use of
third-party verification of
the quality of the tracing
systems.
”At Stora Enso, we think that
an independent third-party
verification is proof enough
that our system of tracing the
origin of wood works. We make
the adjustments required by
the auditor. That one fourth
of the loggings in Russia
should be illegal is quite a
high estimate – especially as
we do not know what it is
based on,” says Ms.
Helena Jantunen,
Sustainability Manager for
Stora Enso’s Wood Supply
Russia.
She stresses that Stora Enso
knows the origin of all the
wood it buys from Russia. The
company’s tracing system is
verified by the auditing
specialist Det Norske Veritas.
In addition, Stora Enso has
just been awarded a Controlled
Wood certificate by SmartWood
for the tracing system it uses
in Russia.
”Reports of non-conformities
available”
”We have no problem with
providing reports to those
interested in them of the
non-conformities found in our
auditing and the correcting
actions we have taken,” says
Ms.
Terhi Koipijärvi,
Senior Vice President for
quality and environment at
Metsäliitto.
Stora Enso is of a similar
mind. According to Ms.
Jantunen, there are no
obstacles to publishing the
auditing reports. The company
compiles statistics on, for
example, the number of wood
supply companies rejected or
the number of correcting
measures required of suppliers
as the result of audits.
Ms. Koipijärvi explains that
Metsäliitto’s tracing system
for imported wood observes
both suppliers and actual
fellings. In addition,
Metsäliitto classifies the
suppliers according to the
quality of their operations,
including environmental issues.
Ms. Koipijärvi says that the
system is very up-to-date
including modern mapping
system. “We are very proud of
it.”
Metsäliitto’s tracing system
is verified by the auditing
specialist Bureau Veritas.
”UPM published
non-conformities in 2004”
”I
agree with WWF that the
tracing systems need to be
transparent”, says Ms.
Päivi Salpakivi-Salomaa,
Director of Environmental
Forestry Affairs at UPM. She
says that UPM published
summaries of the
non-conformities found in its
auditing already in the spring
of 2004.
The methods used by UPM in its
tracing system are verified by
Det Norske Veritas, but the
150 annual field audits in
Russia are carried out by the
company’s own personnel.
Ms. Salpakivi-Salomaa points
out that forest companies do
have an important role in
reducing illegal logging, but
they can only do so much.
Other sectors of society that
must also develop accordingly
include legislation and the
citizens’ compliance with it.
All three companies define the
legality of harvesting on the
basis of national legislation.
Krista Kimmo
http://www.forest.fi/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
