The FSC International Generic Indicator (IGI) Group met in Madrid, Spain, in June to start analyzing the feedback received during the first public consultation of the first draft IGI. The group also worked to agree on the next steps for the second draft.
The meeting highlighted the importance of the IGI process and the public consultation. One participant described the IGI process as “the most significant step towards implementing responsible forest management since the establishment of FSC and the Rio Summit in 1992”. This emphasizes the significance of engaging with stakeholders – one of the pillars of the IGI process.
Given the unprecedented amount of feedback from the consultation, the IGI Group has made some clear decisions on the structure of the next draft and is planning the next steps of the process. This includes timely communication with stakeholders to give them time to prepare for the next draft, and to ensure active participation from all the regions and chambers.
The IGI Group also had this message for stakeholders: “A big ‘thank you!’ to all stakeholders! We received comments from all over the world during the 60-day public consultation on the first draft IGIs. These were extremely important for the first phase of the process.” (Summary of feedback)
Richard Robertson, FSC project manager for the IGI Process, added: “We, the IGI Group, are incredibly grateful for the constructive feedback we received from so many stakeholders on the issues we identified in our first, tentative draft.” Richard continued “Having analyzed the feedback, we are now taking significant steps to formulate a much-improved second draft for you. It is, as ever, remarkable to witness FSC’s multistakeholder approach in action and on such a scale.”
Addressing the major issues
After analyzing the feedback, the IGI Group came up with a process to systematically respond to this feedback. Immediate measures will include simplifying the language used and reducing the number of indicators wherever possible (e.g. redundancies, duplications, etc.). The group will also review the indicators with a performance focus to reduce the burden on the system imposed by process type indicators. In addition – and as promised in the first draft IGI – the IGI Group formulated a methodology for addressing Scale, Intensity and Risk and is now testing this.