4. Conclusion
The large number of objective indicators in the Brazilian FSC standards limits the possibility that auditors shape its implementation. Nevertheless, they still have important responsibilities in the process of implementation, some of which involve risks for the certification bodies themselves. FSC should undertake systematic surveys, based on ASI assessments, with certification bodies, to identify the persisting bottlenecks regarding possible interpretations by auditors and certification bodies.
With the existing system of minor and major non-conformance, the auditors decide how much time the companies have to correct management failures without losing their certification. The certification manager of each audit team is responsible for deciding if the overall performance of the company is sufficient to justify certification, even with a significant number of minor non-conformance issues. At the same time, such decisions are those that allow the company to make further improvements.
Certified companies do not comply with all the indicators of the standard. In the Brazilian context, this means in particular that auditors and certification bodies do not succeed in guaranteeing full compliance with the labor and environmental legislation. FSC should work more closely with national teams to define which indicators of the national standards can explicitly remain not fully in full conformance during a specified period because their full conformance does not depend only on the certificate holders’ actions. FSC could also promote more frequent reviews of the national standards and of their indicators, for example every two years instead of every five years currently, to account for the results of the audits.
