European Journal of Wood and Wood Products

, Volume 76, Issue 3, pp 1061–1069 | Cite as

Chain of custody certification involvement by the British Columbia value-added wood products sector

  • Haris R. Gilani
  • Robert A. Kozak
  • John L. Innes


Chain of custody (CoC) certification has had a growing influence on markets for wood products in recent decades. However, it has experienced limited uptake, particularly among the wood products manufacturing sector. This paper describes the results of a survey conducted in the province of British Columbia (BC) aimed at investigating the adoption of CoC certification in the BC value-added wood products sector. The survey was conducted in the fall of 2013 to determine the level of CoC adoption amongst a selection of value-added wood products manufacturer and to identify their future intentions towards CoC certification. BC value-added wood products manufacturers that are currently engaged in chain of certification tend largely to be firms located in the urban areas of the province. The highest level of adoption was found to be among remanufacturers. Of the respondents, 41% were certified and another 13% of the companies were interested in becoming certified in the next 5 years. The remaining 46% were not certified and not interested in certification, citing a range of barriers including lack of customer demand, high costs of certification, and a lack of price premiums.


  1. Aguilar FX, Vlosky RP (2007) Consumer willingness to pay price premiums for environmentally certified wood products in the US. For Policy Econ 9(8):1100–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson RC, Hansen EN (2004) Determining consumer preferences for ecolabeled forest products: an experimental approach. J For 102(4):28–32Google Scholar
  3. Armstrong JS, Overton TS (1977) Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. J Mark Res 14(3):396–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bigsby H, Ozanne L (2002) The purchase decision: consumers and environmentally certified wood products. For Prod J 52(7/8):100–105Google Scholar
  5. Bowers T, Eastin I, Ganguly I, Cao J, Seol M (2012) Forest certification in Asia: the changing marketplace for value-added wood product manufacturers in China and Vietnam. For Chron 88(5):578–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. CSA (2014) Chain of custody (online). Accessed 15 Sept 2016
  7. Certification Canada (2015) SFM certification status in Canada—2015 year-end (online). Accessed 5 Feb 2017
  8. Chen J, Innes JL, Tikina A (2010) Private cost-benefits of voluntary forest product certification. Int For Rev 12(1):1–12Google Scholar
  9. Chen J, Tikina A, Kozak R, Innes JL, Duinker P, Larson B (2011) The efficacy of forest certification: perceptions of Canadian forest products retailers. For Chron 87(5):636–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohen WM, Klepper S (1996) Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries: the case of process and product R&D. Rev Econ Stat 78(2):232–243Google Scholar
  11. DeLong DL, Kozak RA, Cohen D (2007) Overview of the Canadian value-added wood products sector and the competitive factors that contribute to its success. Can J For Res 37(11):2211–2226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dillman DA (2000) Mail and internet surveys: the tailored design method, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York, p 464Google Scholar
  13. Elliott J (2014) An analysis of willingness to pay and reasons for purchasing certified forest products. Doctoral dissertation, Duke University, USAGoogle Scholar
  14. Espinoza O, Buehlmann U, Smith B (2012) Forest certification and green building standards: overview and use in the US hardwood industry. J Clean Prod 33:30–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ganguly I, Bowers T, Eastin I, Cantrell R (2013) Role of green building programs in enhancing the usage of environmentally certified wood in the US Residential Construction Industry. Int J Constr Educ Res 9(3):183–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Halalisan AF, Marinchescu M, Popa B, Abrudan IV (2013) Chain of custody certification in Romania: profile and perceptions of FSC certified companies. Int For Rev 15(3):305–314Google Scholar
  17. Howard R (1990) Can small business help countries compete? Harvard Bus Rev 68(6):88–103Google Scholar
  18. Hrabovsky E, James P (2005) Global demand for certified hardwood products as determined from a survey of hardwood exporters. For Prod J 55(2):28–35Google Scholar
  19. Humphries S, Vlosky RP, Carter D (2001) Certified wood products merchants in the United States: a comparison between 1995 and 1998. For Prod J 51(6):32–38Google Scholar
  20. Jayasinghe P, Allen DS, Bull GQ, Kozak RA (2007) The status of forest certification in the Canadian value-added wood products manufacturing sector. For Chron 83(1):113–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kozak RA (2002) Internet readiness and e-business adoption of Canadian value-added wood producers. For Chron 78(2):296–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kozak RA, Maness T, Caldecott T (2003) Solid wood supply impediments for secondary wood producers. in British Columbia For Chron 79(6):1107–1120Google Scholar
  23. Kozak RA, Cohen DH, Lerner J, Bull GQ (2004) Western Canadian consumer attitudes towards certified value-added wood products: an. exploratory assessment. For Prod J 54(9):21–24Google Scholar
  24. McIlhenney K, Hayter R (2013) Sustaining jobs and environment? The value-added wood industry in Metro Vancouver,British Columbia. Local Environ. doi: 10.1080/13549839.2013.854755 Google Scholar
  25. Montague IB (2011) Understanding chain-of-custody certification in the Appalachian hardwood region:primary manufacturers’ practices and perceptions. In: Fei S, Lhotka JM, Stringer JW, Gottschalk KW, Miller GW (eds) General technical report NRS-P-78. Proceedings of the 17th Central Hardwood Forest Conference, Lexington, USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newton Square, Pennsylvania, 5–7 April 2010, pp 607–616Google Scholar
  26. Natural Resources Canada (2015) Secondary manufacturing of forest products (online). Accessed 31 Mar 2015
  27. Owari T, Sawanobori Y (2007) Analysis of the certified forest products market in Japan. Eur J Wood Prod 65(2):113–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ozanne L, Vlosky R (1997) Willingness to pay for environmentally certified wood products: a consumer perspective. For Prod J 47(6):39–48Google Scholar
  29. Parfitt B (2011) Making the case for a carbon focus and green jobs in BC’s forest industry. Hands on Publications, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  30. Schultz R, Kozak RA, Merkel G, Sunderman R, Thrower J (2013) Growing the BC interior value-added wood sector. Summary report. Prepared for the Southern Interior Beetle Action CoalitionGoogle Scholar
  31. Sowlati T (2013) Current and future role of information technology in the global forest sector. Theglobal forest sector: changes, practices, and prospects, p 317Google Scholar
  32. Statistics Canada (2013) The great US recession and Canadian forest products (online). Accessed 1 Apr 2015
  33. Stennes B, Wilson B (2008) Secondary manufacturing of solid wood products in British Columbia, 2006: structure,economic contributionand changes since 1990. Pacific Forestry CentreGoogle Scholar
  34. Testa F, Iraldo F, Vaccari A, Ferrari E (2013) Why eco-labels can be effective marketing tools: evidence from a study on Italian consumers. Bus Strat Env. doi: 10.1002/bse.1821 Google Scholar
  35. Toppinen A, Toivonen R, Valkeapää A, Rämö AK (2013) Consumer perceptions of environmental and social sustainability of wood products in the Finnish market. Scand J For Res 28(8):775–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) (2013) Forest products annual market review. 2012–2013. United Nations, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  37. Vidal N, Kozak RA, Cohen D (2005) Chain of custody certification: an assessment of the North American solid wood sector. For Policy Econ 7(3):345–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vlosky RP, Gazo R, Cassens D (2007) Certification involvement by selected United States value-added solid wood products sectors. Wood Fiber Sci 35(4):560–569Google Scholar
  39. Yamamoto Y, Takeuchi K, Shinkuma T (2014) Is there a price premium for certified wood? Empirical evidence from log auction data in Japan. For Policy Econ 38:168–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Haris R. Gilani
    • 1
  • Robert A. Kozak
    • 1
  • John L. Innes
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of ForestryUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations