Empirical Analysis on the Practical Feasibility of Timber Legality Verification Work in China


With the acceleration of economic globalization and trade liberalization, illegal logging and timber trade, which are closely related to the ecological environment and climate change, have aroused extensive concern within the international community. Based on the authors’ long-term experience and accumulated knowledge, as well as extensive field investigation, this article offers a range of observations. Firstly, it analyzes the worldwide significance and annual changes of China’s forest products trade; secondly it reviews China’s legal timber logging, transport and management systems and major challenges; thirdly, it compares timber legality verification schemes and methods around the world and summarizes experience of their implementation; fourthly, it proposes countermeasures and suggestions on strengthening the timber legality management in China; finally, the paper discusses the practical feasibility of timber legality verification work in China. The results of the authors’ research show that strict forest logging quota management means the risk of illegally logging in China is relatively low, that legality verification in China can meet the international market demand for legal timbers and that launching timber legality verification work in China is therefore feasible. This would make a significant contribution to breaking through green trade barriers, enhancing China’s position in negotiations, and promoting the standardization of the timber international trade.

Share and Cite:

Li, J. and Chen, S. (2015) Empirical Analysis on the Practical Feasibility of Timber Legality Verification Work in China. Open Journal of Political Science, 5, 167-179. doi: 10.4236/ojps.2015.53018.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Atyi, R. E., Assembe-Mvondo, S., Lescuyer, G., & Cerutti, P. (2013). Impacts of International Timber Procurement Policies on Central Africa’s Forestry Sector: The Case of Cameroon. Forest Policy and Economics, 32, 40-48.
[2] Australian Government (2013). The Illegal Logging Prohibition Act 2012 received Royal Assent on 28 November 2012 and is now law in Australia [EB/OL].
[3] Brack, D. (2010). Controlling Illegal Logging: Consumer-Country Measures. London: Chatham House.
[4] Carlsen, K., Hansen, C. P., & Lund, J. F. (2012). Factors Affecting Certification Uptake—Perspectives from the Timber Industry in Ghana. Forest Policy and Economics, 25, 83-92.
[5] Cashore, B., & Stone, M. W. (2012). Can Legality Verification Rescue Global Forest Governance? Analyzing the Potential of Public and Private Policy Intersection to Ameliorate Forest Challenges in Southeast Asia. Forest Policy and Economics, 18, 13-22.
[6] Chen, X. Q., & Wu, S. F. (2013). Impacts of the Amendments to the U.S. Lacey Act on the Export of China’s Timber Products. Forestry Economics, 1, 62-66. (In Chinese)
[7] Deng, Z. G. (2010). China Forest Certification Research Summary. Problems of Forestry Economics, 30, 458-461. (In Chinese)
[8] Department of International Organizations and Conferences (DIOC), SFA (2012-11-23) Ten Years of Forestry: Overview of International Exchanges & Cooperation [EB/OL] [2013-5-19]. (In Chinese)
[9] EFI (European Forest Institute) (2011). Support Study for Development of the Non-Legislative Acts Provided for in the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Laying Down the Obligations of Operators Who Place Timber and Timber Products on the Market.
[10] FAO. Forest Products Trade Database [EB/OL] (2014-07-31) [2015-01-30].
[11] Lawson, S., & MacFaul, L. (2010). Illegal Logging and Related Trade, Indicators of the Global Response. London: Chatham House.
[12] Li, X. Y., Chen, X. Q., Hou, F. M. et al. (2010). Analysis on the Connotation and Reference Point of the Green Government Procurement of Forest Products. Resource Development & Market, 6, 539-543. (In Chinese)
[13] Lin, Y. H., Lin, S., & Qiu, R. Z. (2011). RFID-Based Tracking System Design of Raw Materials of Forest Products. Forest Engineering, 4, 34-37. (In Chinese)
[14] Liu, H. C. (2010). Present Situation and Recommendations on the FSC Certification of Forest Products. Knowledge Economy, 18, 40. (In Chinese)
[15] Ochieng, R. M., Visseren-Hamakers, I. J., & Nketiah, K. S. (2013). Interaction between the FLEGT-VPA and REDD+ in Ghana: Recommendations for Interaction Management. Forest Policy and Economics, 32, 32-39.
[16] Ros-Tonen, M. A. F., Insaidoo, T. F. G., & Acheampong, E. (2013). Promising Start, Bleak Outlook: The Role of Ghana’s Modified Taungya System as a Social Safeguard in Timber Legality Processes. Forest Policy and Economics, 32, 57-67.
[17] SFA (State Forestry Administration) (2014). China Forestry Development Report 2014. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House.
[18] Shen, L., Zeng, X., & Xie, D. M. (2010). Present Situation of the World Forest Certification and Its Implications in China’s Forest Certification. Jiangxi Forestry Science & Technology, 1, 32-36. (In Chinese)
[19] TTF (Timber Trade Federation) (2010). Background to the RPP (Responsible Purchasing Policy). London: Timber Trade Federation Responsible Purchasing Policy Document.
[20] Tysiachniouk, M. (2013). Fostering Transparency in the Transnational Supply Chain: From Russian Forest Producers to Consumers in Europe and the USA. Forest Policy and Economics, 31, 3-11.
[21] van Heeswijk, L., & Turnhout, E. (2013). The Discursive Structure of FLEGT (Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade): The Negotiation and Interpretation of Legality in the EU and Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 32, 6-13.
[22] Wang, J. X. (2013). China’s Standard Framework of Forest Certification. China Quality Certification, 1, 39-40. (In Chinese)
[23] Wang, X. Z., Su, H. Y., He, Y. Y. et al. (2011). Impact Assessment and Reference of the Green Procurement Policies on Forest Products in Major Developed Countries. Forestry Economics, 11, 87-91. (In Chinese)
[24] Wiersum, K. F., & Elands, B. H. M. (2013). Opinions on Legality Principles Considered in the FLEGT/VPA Policy in Ghana and Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 32, 14-22.
[25] Wiersum, K. F., Lescuyer, G., Nketiah, K. S., & Wit, M. (2013). International Forest Governance Regimes: Reconciling Concerns on Timber Legality and Forest-Based Livelihoods. Forest Policy and Economics, 32, 1-5.
[26] Yang, L. H., & Yin, S. H. (2011). Study on the Difficulties and Countermeasures for China’s Trade of Forest Products under New Situation. Problems of Forestry Economics, 31, 294-297. (In Chinese)

Copyright © 2023 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.