Achter het label: Milieueffecten van voedsel- en boscertificering

Voluntary Sustainability Standards (VSS), or certification, have become a widely used tool to promote sustainability in agriculture and forestry. By setting criteria for producers, VSS aim to minimise environmental harm from food and wood production. In 2021, over 11% of the global forest area and more than 11% of the production area for coffee, cocoa, tea and oil palm were certified. However, research on VSS effectiveness shows mixed results, and important knowledge gaps remain, particularly for cocoa certification in Southeast Asia. This thesis addresses these gaps by evaluating the environmental impacts of VSS at both national and farm levels. At national level, increasing certification coverage was not associated with reduced deforestation. This finding is based on data from seven food-related and two forestry-related VSS across 67 tropical countries. Among food certification schemes, only Fairtrade coincided with lower primary forest loss, while UTZ, RSPO and Organic were associated with higher forest loss. Forestry certification through FSC and PEFC did not significantly affect net forest cover over twenty years. Instead, countries with more certified forest showed greater temporary forest loss, likely due to logging in managed forests and plantations. These results raise doubts about the capacity of VSS to reduce either permanent or temporary forest loss and question their contribution to global deforestation targets. At farm level, the analysis focused on certified and non-certified cocoa plantations in Sulawesi, Indonesia, the world's third largest cocoa producer. Most environmental indicators showed no significant difference. Certified farms did not support higher bird species richness, shade tree cover, soil fertility or acoustic diversity. Remote sensing analysis also found no improvements in vegetation indices following certification. These findings challenge the assumption that certification improves on-farm ecological conditions and suggest that criteria may be too weak or poorly enforced. For instance, Rainforest Alliance currently requires only 15% natural vegetation cover, a threshold unlikely to yield ecological benefits. The study also examined where certification is implemented. In Sulawesi, it primarily reached farmers near infrastructure and those already organised in farmer groups. It largely bypassed farmers near forest frontiers and those facing greater economic vulnerability. This limits its potential to reduce deforestation or support the farmers most in need. Faced with declining yields, ageing cocoa trees, pests, diseases and unstable prices, many farmers converted cocoa plantations to more profitable crops like oil palm and maize. Certification could help address these issues by improving resilience and productivity, for example through training in good agricultural practices such as side grafting, but this potential remains unrealised in many cases. This dissertation adds to growing evidence that certification, in its current form, often falls short of delivering environmental benefits. Outcomes depend heavily on the strength of standards, quality of implementation and capacity of local actors. Certification is therefore not a silver bullet for sustainable land use. To improve effectiveness, several policy changes are needed. Environmental standards should be raised, for example by restoring the former Rainforest Alliance requirement of 40% canopy cover and actively promoting agroforestry. Agroforestry supports biodiversity, strengthens climate resilience and contributes to food security by diversifying farm income. Certification must also offer higher and more stable prices to provide real incentives for sustainable practices. Targeted training and extension services are essential to support farmers in sustainable management and help stabilise yields. Farmer involvement in certification governance should be strengthened by improving farmers' understanding of certification requirements and supporting cooperatives as certificate holders. Greater transparency is needed: audit reports and the locations of certified farms should be made publicly accessible to enable independent evaluation and accountability. Finally, the effectiveness of certification might be enhanced by integrating it with other governance tools, including zero deforestation commitments, stronger national policies and greater private sector engagement.