The Analysis of Problems in the Certification Application in State Forestry Administration in Turkey

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 2, 102 - 110, 30.11.2017

Osman Komut Atakan Öztürk

Öz

The use of natural sources and
increase in environmental damage around the world have come to a state in which
it threatens the existence and functionality of forest resources as well as
other natural resources’. The idea that economic development can only be
achieved through the mentality of sustainable forest management supported by
community involvement has ensured the improvement in certification systems of
forestry and forest product. Therefore, in this study, the opinions of
directors of state forestry administration in Turkey concerning the
difficulties encountered or hardships which are possible to encounter in
forestry and forest products certification are addressed. In this context, a
questionnaire based on the face-to-face interview method has been carried out
on 147 participants in manager position in 71 different State Forestry Management.
While 11 of the forestry managements, on which the questionnaire is conducted,
have FSC forest management certificates, 60 are non-certified businesses. At
the end of this study, that bureaucratic procedures will increase within the
management and that malfunctions will be experienced with respect to the
operation, low level of certification awareness in Turkey, the inadequacy of
collaboration between stakeholders and the incomplete forest cadastre all are
determined as major obstacles to the certification. On the other hand, it has
been detected that there are noteworthy differences in opinions between
employees in certified companies and workers in non-certified businesses in
respect to worker’s health and safety, and stakeholder collaboration. In addition,
it is conducted that there are significant differences between the working
hours of participants and the participants’ opinions concerning the problems
encountered in the forest products certification.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Forest management, Forestry and forest products, Certification, state forestry administration

Kaynakça

• Baharuddin H. G. 1995. Timber Certification: An Overview, Unasylva, 46(183), 18-24.
• Baykal H. & Baykal T. 2008. Environmental Problems in the Globalizing World, Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 5(9), 2-17.
• Chen J. & Innes J. L. 2013. The Implications of New Forest Tenure Reforms and Forestry Property Markets for Sustainable Forest Management and Forest Certification in China, Journal of Environmental Management, 129, 206-215.
• Dölarslan E. Ş. 2007. Conservation of Forests in Europe Conference of Ministers Conference on Sustainable Forest Management, Süleyman Demirel University Journal of Forestry, A(2), 159-174.
• Durusoy I. & Türker M. F. 2005. Sustainable Forest Resources Management and Certification, 1st Environment and Forestry Forum, Antalya, Turkey.
• FSC, 2015. Forest Stewardship Council website. http://info.fsc.org/index.php#result. (accessed 18 December 2015)
• Genç A. 2014. Problems Encountered in Implementation of Forest Management Certificate and Suggestions for Solution (Kastamonu Forest Regional Directorate), Masters Thesis, Kastamonu University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences Department of Forest Engineering, Kastamonu, Turkey.
• Kiker C. F. & Putz F. E. 1997. Methodological and Ideological Options, Ecolocical Certification of Forest Products: Economic Challenges, Ecological Economics, 20(1997), 37-51.
• OGM, 2016. T.C. Ministry of Forestry and Water website. http://www.ogm.gov.tr/ Documents/Kurulusumuz/TeskilatSema.pdf (accessed 15 January 2016)
• Owari T., Juslin H., Rummukainen A. & Yoshimura T. 2006. Strategies, Functions and Benefits of Forest Certification in Wood Products Marketing: Perspectives of Finnish Suppliers, Forest Policy and Economics, 9(2006), 380-390.
• Özmehmet E. 2012. Sustainable Development Approaches in the World and Turkey, Yaşar University Journal, 3(12), 1853-1876.
• Ruckelshaus W. D. 1989. Toward a Sustainable World, Scientific Amerikan, 261(3), 166-175.
• Schepers D. H. 2010. Challenges to Legitimacy at the Forest Stewardship Council, Journal of Business Ethics, 92, 279–290.
• UNECE/FAO, 2015. Forest Products Annual Market Review 2014-2015. United Nations Publications, http://dx.doi.org/10.18356/4f5cd0dd-en. (accessed 22 December 2015)
• United Nations, 2015. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427. http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-ov.htm (accessed 20 December 2015)
• Tavşancıl E. 2014. Attitude Measurement and Data Analysis with SPSS, 5th Edition, Nobel Publications, Ankara, Turkey.
• Thompson D. W., Anderson R. C., Hansen E. N., & Kahle L. R. 2010. Green Segmentation and Environmental Certification: Insights from Forest Products, Business Strategy and the Environment, 19, 319–334.
• Toprak D. 2006. Environmental Policies and Financial Instruments in the Framework of Sustainable Development, Süleyman Demirel University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 2(4), 146-169.
• Türker M. F., Barlı Ö., & Ayyıldız H. 2009. A Research on Determining Business Culture in Turkish Forestry Organization. 1nd ed., Publication of the Forestry and Nature Conservation Foundation, Ankara, Turkey.