CHATHAM HOUSE Illegal Logging Update and Stakeholder Consultation

9-10 July 2007

PUBLIC PROCUREMENTState of Play in Denmark

by: Christian Lundmark Jensen

Danish Ministry of the Environment

Forest and Nature Agency

Green Procurement in DK - milestones since mid 1990ties

1995- 50 procurement guidelines developed for numerous products

Many supporting facilities: Buyers Panel, SKI and PP Network

2001 Parliament decision on Tropical Timber

2003 Voluntary procurement guidelines on Tropical Timber

2004 Information campaign on Tropical Timber

2005 Evaluation of guidelines on Tropical Timber

2006 9-point-plan on legal and sustainable timber (all timber)

Temporary guidance on legal timber (all timber)

2007 Draft revised criteria for ‘legal’ and ‘sustainable’ (all timber) out for public consultation

Declared line of sight from Environment Minister Connie Hedegaard,

when launching her 9-point-plan in 2006

All public buyers should buy ’legal’ and

’sustainable’ timber

What’s the problem?TropicalPublic

EU-directivesEU FLEGT WTO/GPA

CriteriaLegal

SustainablePhased approach...

Certification + CoCAlternative documentation

Assesment

Rio Forest PrinciplesITTO, CBD

ILO, ISO, FPIC

ToolsGuidelines

Wood as materialWood products

Harmonisation EU, UK, NL,

France, Belgium GermanyVoluntary

Binding rules

What’s the possibilities?

Draft Revised DK Criteria

Criteria UK / DK (identical)

1. StandardsLegal 4 / 4 (all)

Sustainable frame 2 / 0 (0) - slight dif. on link to int. framework

Sustainable specifics 4 / 6 (4) - DK: + social + extent of forest resource

Sustainable process 3 / 5 (1) - DK explicitely accept two processes

2. Certification 6 / 6 (all)

3. Accreditation 1 / 1 (all)

4. CoC and labelling 6 / 6 (4) - dif. on link to forest and mix/70 %

Total 26 / 30 (20)

Comments to DK draft

• 44 organisations and agencies responded• 10 domestic• 34 from foreign countries or international org.

e.g. UK, Finland, Malaysia, Australia, US, Canada, Norway, Sweden, Brazil + int. org.

• more than 100 pages with detailed comments– many constructive proposals for technical improvements

– some good food for thought, e.g.:do we at all NEED this kind of work (national criteria setting); concern about uncertified suppliers,

– strong calls for more cautious approaches, e.g. on social + extent

– strong calls for more rigorious approaches, e.g. on social + extent

(All comments available at full length at the internet)

Next steps• Consider all comments carefully

• Keen to engage in broader stakeholder discussion, e.g. on social aspects and/or extent of ressource

• Keen to contribute to harmonisation efforts

• However, also keen to move on and improve guidance to buyers -as said in the 9-point-plan

• Keen to address alternative means for doc. in a practical, yet ambitious way (e.g. underpin FLEGT)

– we have some guidance already (tropical timber guidelines)– CPET has some (very long!) guidance– Seminar in Copenhagen March 2007– Timber tracking project in Russia finalised– Look into existing VLO/VLC tools and systems– Address the missing link from forest to buyer– Non controversial areas and countries?

Thank you

WWW.SNS.DK

Go to English version ”Public Procurement of Timber”