Conflicting interests in the standard setting process of the PEFC forest certification scheme in Finland

This study investigates the revision of the PEFC forest certification standard, a multi-stakeholder process, using the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF). It addresses changes in the standard's ecological criteria and the factors affecting them. Ten members of the standard working group were interviewed, supported by a document review. Three advocacy coalitions—forestry, environmental, and social— were identified, contrasting with prior studies on Finnish forest policy. The forestry coalition outnumbered the other two coalitions in their policy-relevant resources. Decision-making authority and opportunities for equal participation were perceived as weak by the others. It had sufficient resources to invest in strong participation, access to information and skilful leadership. The historical dominance of the forestry coalition when it comes to Finnish forest policy persisted, and the revision process indicated a lack of trust and a divide between coalitions. Dissatisfaction with the ecological criteria led to the withdrawal of the environmental coalition representatives from the standard working group. Changes in the ecological criteria between 2014 and 2022 were minor, despite the urgent need to reverse impairments from previous updates of the standard. The influence of ecological science on the revision was weak. Attempts to weaken criteria on old-growth forests were observed, raising questions about the forestry coalition's commitment to biodiversity protection. The level of environmental, social, and economic sustainability in PEFC standards were largely determined by the forestry coalition. • We studied the PEFC standard revision process using stakeholder interviews. • ACF theory was a suitable framework to study the standard revision process. • The forestry coalition dominated the process with ample policy-relevant resources. • The other two coalitions had limited opportunities to influence decisions. • There were only minor improvements to the ecological criteria as well as some setbacks.