[3][4] A number of other economic and regulatory mechanisms such as financial aid, policy frameworks, and trade conventions were also established to prevent and mitigate deforestation.

Despite the increased levels of concern in the run-up to the 1992 Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro, tensions between the North and the global South over access to finance and technology for the preservation of forests protracted negotiations.

[5] Although many Northern countries had hoped for a legally binding convention, the resulting Statement of Forest Principles represents the "mean position of the lowest common denominator"[5] and is voluntary.

Disappointed with the outcome of the Earth Summit, NGOs such as the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) began to turn their attention to industry for a governance-oriented resolution to deforestation.

In America, the consultation process that eventually led to the establishment of the FSC was initiated in 1990 and concluded in the confirmation of support for the development of a voluntary worldwide certification and accreditation governance system that would cover all forest types.

[6] Through stakeholder involvement, it became apparent that a standard-setting body would be required to verify the source of wood products and define sustainable forest management.

[9] These requirements – called International Generic Indicators (IGIs) – are intended to ensure consistent application of the FSC P&C across all countries.

[11] The FSC's stated mission is to "promote environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world's forests".

[12] It claims that forests managed to its standards offer benefits to both local and wider communities, and these are said to include cleaner air and water, and a contribution to mitigating the effects of climate change.

FSC addresses issues such as illegal logging, deforestation and global warming and some reports indicate positive effects on economic development, environmental conservation, poverty alleviation, and social and political empowerment.

In 2009, FSC began a pilot project with Fairtrade International (FLO)[32] to help community-based and small-scale timber producers get a fair price for their products and gain visibility in the marketplace.

[33] The first jointly labelled FSC-FLO products went onto the market in 2011, using wood from the forests of the Curacautín Valley in Chile, manufactured commercially by Swedish firm Kährs.

The FSC label is used on a wide range of timber and non-timber products, from paper and furniture to medicine and jewelry,[38] and aims to give consumers the option of supporting responsible forestry.

If an accreditation body finds forest management at an organisation to be non-compliant, pre-conditions are noted which must be fulfilled before the FSC certificate can be awarded.

It tracks the flow of certified wood through the supply chain and across borders through each successive stage – including processing, transformation and manufacturing – all the way to the final product.

[citation needed] All operations that want to produce an FSC-certified product or want to make corresponding sales claims must comply with FSC's international standards for chain of custody.

[48] In addition, FSC certified wood products can contribute to score up to 1 point in the LEED v4.1 pilot credit 'Social Equity within the Supply Chain'.

These included FERN (2011),[58] Friends of the Earth UK (2008),[59] ROBINWOOD (2009),[60] the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation (SSNC) (2011),[61] and smaller groups such as Rainforest Rescue[62] and the Association for the Ecological Defence of Galicia (ADEGA).

[63] In this same period other NGO members and commenters issued critical evaluations of FSC's performance and made recommendations to improve the credibility of the organization.

[61] In 2008, the EcoEarth/Rainforest Portal, an Internet ecological news aggregation service, publicly questioned the FSC-endorsed policy of old-growth forest logging.

[68] But it also identified ongoing weaknesses, including a lack of guidance on high conservation value forests (HCVFs), activities in controversial areas like the Congo Basin, problems with the Controlled Wood label, and the integrity of the Chain of Custody system and logo.

In July 2012, members of the Algonquin community in southern Quebec staged a camp to observe and deter the logging of their unceded territory.

The firm stated that their "right to harvest in the area [had] been approved by the QMNRW, following appropriate consultation with the Barrière Lake Algonquin band council.

SLIMF adapts the FSC system by offering special streamlined procedures with less rigorous requirements for a number of its forest management criteria.

[80] Because it works outside of state regulations, some academics have classified FSC as an example of a non-state market driven (NSMD) form of environmental governance.

[82] As Cashore observes, the FSC network does not have the political authority of a traditional nation state and no one can be fined or imprisoned for failing to comply with its regulations.

[68] The FSC Label is an example of the use of public purchasing power to create shifts in industry and regulate the negative environmental impacts of deforestation.

The market is seen as the key mechanism for producing the maximum social good and governance networks are seen as the most efficient way to regulate environmental concerns.

As Bäckstrand states, the FSC governance network brings together private companies, organizations and civil society in a non-hierarchical fashion, to voluntarily address certain goals.

[86] Through the chamber system, governance of FSC has checks at local, national and international levels which mean that it includes interests regardless of their geographical location.