Search

In the recent decades, forest certification based on third-party external audits has gained momentum. This type of certification has been developed as a monitoring tool aimed at improving governance in corporate environmental management and differentiating products in the increasing environmentally sensitive markets. Although the scholarly literature has extensively analyzed the adoption and dissemination of forest certification, the findings of the external audits and certification practices remain under researched. On the basis of the analysis of 105 audit reports issued by accredited third-party certification bodies in Romania, this article sheds light on procedural factors that have significant influence on the characteristics of non-conformities (NCs) identified by Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) third party audits. Our research offers empirical evidence that certain procedural factors such as the type of assessment, auditing days, number of auditors, or the presence of foreign members in an audit team have a significant influence on the auditing process outcomes: number and grade of non-conformities, standard references, or methods of NC detection. The study opens interesting new lines of research—the influence of procedural or other types of contextual factors on certification outcomes—and provides indications on the effectiveness of the certification procedures and guidelines in certification process quality assurance.

In the recent decades, forest certification based on third-party external audits has gained momentum. This type of certification has been developed as a monitoring tool aimed at improving governance in corporate environmental management and differentiating products in the increasing environmentally sensitive markets. Although the scholarly literature has extensively analyzed the adoption and dissemination of forest certification, the findings of the external audits and certification practices remain under researched. On the basis of the analysis of 105 audit reports issued by accredited third-party certification bodies in Romania, this article sheds light on procedural factors that have significant influence on the characteristics of non-conformities (NCs) identified by Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) third party audits. Our research offers empirical evidence that certain procedural factors such as the type of assessment, auditing days, number of auditors, or the presence of foreign members in an audit team have a significant influence on the auditing process outcomes: number and grade of non-conformities, standard references, or methods of NC detection. The study opens interesting new lines of research—the influence of procedural or other types of contextual factors on certification outcomes—and provides indications on the effectiveness of the certification procedures and guidelines in certification process quality assurance.

In the recent decades, forest certification based on third-party external audits has gained momentum. This type of certification has been developed as a monitoring tool aimed at improving governance in corporate environmental management and differentiating products in the increasing environmentally sensitive markets. Although the scholarly literature has extensively analyzed the adoption and dissemination of forest certification, the findings of the external audits and certification practices remain under researched. On the basis of the analysis of 105 audit reports issued by accredited third-party certification bodies in Romania, this article sheds light on procedural factors that have significant influence on the characteristics of non-conformities (NCs) identified by Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) third party audits. Our research offers empirical evidence that certain procedural factors such as the type of assessment, auditing days, number of auditors, or the presence of foreign members in an audit team have a significant influence on the auditing process outcomes: number and grade of non-conformities, standard references, or methods of NC detection. The study opens interesting new lines of research—the influence of procedural or other types of contextual factors on certification outcomes—and provides indications on the effectiveness of the certification procedures and guidelines in certification process quality assurance.