产销监管链认证标准与木材合法性认定体系关联性研究

发布时间：2018-01-01 03:35

本文关键词：产销监管链认证标准与木材合法性认定体系关联性研究　出处：《中国林业科学研究院》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：由于非法采伐直接导致了一系列恶劣的社会、环境问题的产生，近年来，非法采伐及相关贸易问题已成为备受国际社会关注的热点和敏感问题。国际社会也已采取各种行动和措施严厉打击非法采伐及相关贸易。 2008年5月美国颁布了《雷斯法案》修正案，将法案涉及的范围扩展到了木材及木制品以禁止非法采伐木材及木制品进入美国市场；2010年10月欧盟通过了《欧盟木材法案》，要求进口商对投入欧盟市场的木材及木制品进行尽职调查；2012年11月澳大利亚通过了《非法木材采伐禁止法案》，以立法的形式降低非法采伐木材进入其流通领域的风险，打击非法采伐。鉴于欧盟是中国仅次于美国的第二大林产品贸易市场，且《欧盟木材法案》明确要求进口商进行尽职调查，提供木材来源合法的证明，为了适应该要求同时打击非法采伐，中国专门依据《欧盟木材法案》的要求制定了产销监管链认证标准，为企业提供木材来源合法的证明。同时，有关部门也正在研究制定中国的木材合法性认定体系，以期为企业提供另一种证明木材来源合法的途径。关于森林认证和木材合法性认定这两种证明木材合法来源的途径的比较，国内外已开展了不少研究，但多是从宏观层面上对世界上现有的体系进行比较，且多是经营层面的森林经营标准与木材合法性标准间的比较。而完全针对某个具体国家两种体系的比较研究很少。因此，本文从这方面展开研究，探讨中国的产销监管链认证与木材合法性认定的关联性及两者在操作上的异同，为我国的木材合法性研究发展提供建议，为企业应对《欧盟木材法案》和其他国际性的木材合法性要求提供应对措施。本文分理论层面和实际操作层面，分别从体系的目标、具体操作办法、与《欧盟木材法案》的适应性、操作难度等方面对两个体系进行比较。比较研究结果表明，两个体系都可以保证木材的合法来源与合法流通，但产销监管链认证不仅能保证木材来源的合法性，还能保证木材来源的可持续性；相对于木材合法性认定体系的起步状态，，产销监管链认证已通过层层试点，在中国已发展完善；木材合法性认定要通过与木材来源国签订协议来保证木材的合法性，操作难度较大，而产销监管链认证直接由第三方认证机构进行认证，操作简单易行；《欧盟木材法案》已认定经过森林认证的林产品具低风险，不需进行进一步风险规避，而木材合法性认定体系在制定后能否得到欧盟的认可还是未知数。通过研究比较可以看出，木材合法性认定与产销监管链认证存在较大的重复性，可以考虑将木材合法性认定并入森林认证。而对于企业，如果自身没有能力建立并有效维护其整个供应链，进行产销监管链认证仍是其最优选择。
[Abstract]:In recent years , illegal logging and related trade issues have become a hot and sensitive issue of concern to the international community , as illegal logging directly leads to a series of harsh social and environmental problems . Various actions and measures have been taken by the international community to crack down on illegal logging and related trade . In May 2008 , the United States enacted the amendments to the legislation of the Hague Bill to extend the scope of the bill to timber and wood products to prohibit illegal logging of timber and wood products from entering the United States market ; in October 2010 , the European Union adopted the European Union Timber Act , which called for importers to conduct due diligence on timber and wood products invested in the European Union market ; in November 2012 , Australia adopted the illegal timber harvesting prohibition bill to reduce the risk of illegal logging into its flow area in the form of legislation and to combat illegal logging . In view of the fact that the European Union is China ' s second largest forest product trade market next to the United States , and the European Union Timber Act clearly requires importers to conduct due diligence to provide evidence that timber sources are legal , China has established certification standards for timber sources in order to meet the requirements . In the meantime , the relevant departments are studying the establishment of China ' s timber legality identification system , with a view to providing another way to prove the legal origin of timber sources . On the basis of the comparison between the two types of timber legal sources of forest certification and timber legality , many researches have been carried out at home and abroad , but many are compared with the existing systems in the world at the macro level . This paper compares the two systems in terms of theoretical and practical aspects . The results show that both systems can guarantee the legal origin and legal circulation of timber , but the certification of production and sale supervision chain can guarantee the legality of timber sources and ensure the sustainability of timber sources . It can be seen from the comparison that the legitimacy of timber and the certification of production and sales supervision chain have great repeatability , and it is possible to consider incorporating timber legality into forest certification . For enterprises , if they do not have the ability to establish and maintain their entire supply chain , the certification of production and marketing supervision chain is still the best choice .

【学位授予单位】：中国林业科学研究院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：F203;F426.88;D922.63

【参考文献】