{"id":5131,"date":"2026-03-02T11:00:01","date_gmt":"2026-03-02T12:00:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/?p=5131"},"modified":"2026-03-05T14:54:48","modified_gmt":"2026-03-05T14:54:48","slug":"sustainability-in-your-ear-the-forest-stewardship-councils-path-to-a-circular-bio-based-future-with-loa-dalgaard-worm","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/index.php\/2026\/03\/02\/sustainability-in-your-ear-the-forest-stewardship-councils-path-to-a-circular-bio-based-future-with-loa-dalgaard-worm\/","title":{"rendered":"Sustainability In Your Ear: The Forest Stewardship Councils\u2019 Path to a Circular Bio-based Future with Loa Dalgaard Worm"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"bsf_rt_marker\"><\/div>\n<div>\n<p>Forests are vital for people everywhere. They cover about 4.14 billion hectares, roughly a third of the world\u2019s land, and store 714 gigatons of carbon. They also support 80% of land-based biodiversity. However, we are losing 11 million hectares each year to deforestation, and the <a href=\"https:\/\/documents1.worldbank.org\/curated\/en\/240231467291388831\/pdf\/106467-REVISED-v1-PUBLIC.pdf\">World Bank expects<\/a> demand for forest-based products to rise by 400% by 2050. Many industries, from construction to textiles and automotive, are turning to wood fiber to replace fossil-based materials. Yet, a 2023 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.circularity-gap.world\/2023\">Circularity Gap Report found<\/a> that over 90% of materials entering the global economy come from nature and end up in landfills. This approach is not sustainable. If we do not change how we use and reuse fiber, forests will be depleted faster than they can recover.<\/p>\n<p>Today\u2019s guest, Loa Dalgaard Worm, leads the <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/en\/circularity\">Forest Stewardship Council\u2019s Circularity Hub<\/a>. This innovation team, launched in 2023, is updating a certification system that was originally designed for a linear economy 30 years ago. Her team is working to add circular business models, like take-back, repair, and leasing, to FSC\u2019s chain-of-custody standard, which already includes 70,000 companies worldwide. They are also creating a framework to certify agricultural leftovers, such as wheat straw, rice husks, and coffee chaff, as alternative fibers for pulp-based products. This helps reduce the need for new forest fiber.<\/p>\n<div><\/div>\n<div>\n<figure id=\"attachment_366144\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-366144\" style=\"width: 350px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/LoaWorm-inarticle.png\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-366144 size-full lazyload\" src=\"data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAAAAACH5BAEKAAEALAAAAAABAAEAAAICTAEAOw==\" alt=\"\" width=\"350\" height=\"350\" data-src=\"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/LoaWorm-inarticle.png\"><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-366144\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Loa Dalgaard Worm, Circularity Hub Lead at the Forest Stewardship Council, is our guest on <i>Sustainability In Your Ear<\/i>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<p>Loa\u2019s boldest idea is a royalty system that would pay forest owners a small fee each time fiber from their forest is reused or recycled into a new product. Currently, forest owners are paid only once, when they harvest a tree, and do not receive ongoing rewards for protecting ecosystems, conserving biodiversity, or supporting communities. Companies buying recycled fiber would pay for verified origin data, which they increasingly need to meet the <a href=\"https:\/\/environment.ec.europa.eu\/topics\/forests\/deforestation\/regulation-deforestation-free-products_en\">EU Deforestation Regulation<\/a> and other international standards. The pieces for this plan are coming together. FSC already runs <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/en\/fsctrace\">FSC Trace<\/a>, a blockchain-based traceability platform, and works with <a href=\"https:\/\/worldforestid.org\/\">World Forest ID<\/a> on isotope testing that can identify a fiber\u2019s origin within about 15 kilometers. They also partner with <a href=\"https:\/\/www.esri.com\/en-us\/industries\/forestry\/overview\">esri<\/a> to improve earth observation capabilities.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe used to be able to do this,\u201d Loa says about circularity, pointing out that remembering old habits, not just inventing new ones, is key to sustainability. \u201cOur parents knew how to repair things. My grandmother knew how to mend all of her clothes.\u201d FSC\u2019s circularity work is focused on rebuilding the systems needed to help us relearn how to reuse and repair on a large scale. Loa hopes to test the royalty system within two years and present it to FSC\u2019s General Assembly for discussion by 2029. The big question is whether institutions and markets will move quickly enough to protect forests. To learn more about the FSC Circularity Hub, visit <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/en\/circularity\">fsc.org\/circularity<\/a> or email the team at <a href=\"mailto:circularity@fsc.org\">circularity@fsc.org<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<ul class=\"[li_&amp;]:mb-0 [li_&amp;]:mt-1 [li_&amp;]:gap-1 [&amp;:not(:last-child)_ul]:pb-1 [&amp;:not(:last-child)_ol]:pb-1 list-disc flex flex-col gap-1 pl-8 mb-3\">\n<li class=\"whitespace-normal break-words pl-2\">Subscribe to <em>Sustainability In Your Ear<\/em> on <a class=\"underline underline underline-offset-2 decoration-1 decoration-current\/40 hover:decoration-current focus:decoration-current\" href=\"https:\/\/itunes.apple.com\/us\/podcast\/earth911-com-sustainability-in-your-ear\/id1384301001?mt=2\">iTunes<\/a><\/li>\n<li class=\"whitespace-normal break-words pl-2\">Follow <em>Sustainability In Your Ear<\/em> on <a class=\"underline underline underline-offset-2 decoration-1 decoration-current\/40 hover:decoration-current focus:decoration-current\" href=\"https:\/\/www.spreaker.com\/user\/earth911\">Spreaker<\/a>, <a class=\"underline underline underline-offset-2 decoration-1 decoration-current\/40 hover:decoration-current focus:decoration-current\" href=\"https:\/\/www.iheart.com\/podcast\/966-Earth911com-Sustain-29715785\/\">iHeartRadio<\/a>, or <a class=\"underline underline underline-offset-2 decoration-1 decoration-current\/40 hover:decoration-current focus:decoration-current\" href=\"https:\/\/youtube.com\/@elkcreeknotes?si=OYncOJMSzZ857f4L\">YouTube<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2>Interview Transcript<\/h2>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>0:09<\/p>\n<p>Hello, good morning, good afternoon, or good evening, wherever you are on this beautiful planet of ours. Welcome to <em>Sustainability In Your Ear<\/em>. This is the podcast conversation about accelerating the transition to a sustainable, carbon-neutral society, and I\u2019m your host, Mitch Ratcliffe. Thanks for joining the conversation.<\/p>\n<p>Today we\u2019re going to talk forests, wood fiber, and the circular economy. The world\u2019s forests cover about 4.14 billion hectares, which is about a third of all the land on Earth. And they store 714 gigatons of carbon, support 80% of land-based biodiversity, and supply materials for everything from buildings to delivery boxes. The <a href=\"https:\/\/documents1.worldbank.org\/curated\/en\/240231467291388831\/pdf\/106467-REVISED-v1-PUBLIC.pdf\">World Bank<\/a> projects a 400% increase in demand for forest-based products by 2050, driven by the shift away from fossil-based materials. And at the same time, the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.circularity-gap.world\/2023\">Circularity Gap Report<\/a> shows that more than 90% of materials entering the global economy are still virgin. Even as we look to forests to replace plastics, steel, and concrete, we\u2019re losing an additional 11 million hectares a year to deforestation.<\/p>\n<p>The <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/\">Forest Stewardship Council<\/a>, or FSC, is the best-known certification program for responsible forest management. FSC-certified forests now cover more than 171 million hectares in nearly 90 countries, and the system is unique because it gives equal say to environmental groups, social organizations like indigenous peoples and trade unions, as well as economic interests such as timber companies and retailers. For 30 years, FSC has focused on one main question: Where does this wood come from?<\/p>\n<p>Today\u2019s guest, Loa Dalgaard Worm, leads the Forest Stewardship Council\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/en\/circularity\">Circularity Hub<\/a>. This is a new innovation team launched in 2023 that explores what happens to timber after it leaves the forest, and how we can keep it in use longer to reduce pressure on our natural ecosystems. Loa has been with the FSC for over 18 years, working in both national and global roles. As director of FSC Denmark, she grew the group from 12 members to 140 companies and NGOs, and helped raise public awareness for FSC from almost unknown to 65% recognition amongst Danish consumers. She also played a big part in FSC\u2019s digital transformation, and now she leads a team working on what may be FSC\u2019s most ambitious project since it first started chain-of-custody certification\u2014that is, redesigning a system made for a linear economy so that it works in a circular one. She also hosts the <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/en\/podcasts\">Forest for the Future<\/a> podcast, which I urge you to check out. She talks with experts about topics like verifying the origin of fiber products and how the EU taxonomy affects green finance.<\/p>\n<p>The Circularity Hub has published two papers with new proposals that are a first for FSC. One idea is a royalty system that would pay forest owners over time as the fibers from their forest are reused and recycled through many product life cycles. Companies would fund this by paying for verified origin data to meet ESG and regulatory needs. FSC also wants to certify reused and repaired forest products\u2014not just recycled ones\u2014using another new label. They\u2019re also creating a voluntary set of tools to help companies determine if they\u2019re using high-quality wood fiber for disposable packaging that might be better used in construction or furniture, amongst other things.<\/p>\n<p>We\u2019ll talk with Loa about how certification systems created 30 years ago for responsible extraction can change to support circular material flows, and how the royalty system\u2019s financial model will track fibers through many product life cycles and across complex supply chains involved in the modern production environment. We\u2019ll also look at how these proposals fit with new EU circular economy laws and delays to the <a href=\"https:\/\/environment.ec.europa.eu\/topics\/forests\/deforestation\/regulation-deforestation-free-products_en\">EU Deforestation Regulation<\/a>. Finally, we\u2019ll discuss whether FSC can ensure fair access for forest owners in the Global South, or if it might end up mainly helping larger operations in the Nordic countries and North America.<\/p>\n<p>You can learn more about the FSC Circularity Hub by visiting <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/en\/circularity\">fsc.org\/circularity<\/a>. And if you\u2019d like to contact the team, you can email them at <a href=\"mailto:circularity@fsc.org\">circularity@fsc.org<\/a>. So, can the world\u2019s most trusted forest certification system become the foundation for a circular bioeconomy, and can it do it quickly enough to make a big difference? Let\u2019s find out right after this quick commercial break.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>4:50<\/p>\n<p>Welcome to the show, Loa. How you doing today?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>4:52<\/p>\n<p>Thank you, and I\u2019m doing really well. The sun is out for the first time in a very long time in a very frozen Nordic. I\u2019m in Denmark, so it\u2019s really cold here these days. And we can feel spring coming around the corner, good.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>5:07<\/p>\n<p>We\u2019re in the middle of our first snow here in Southern Oregon. So I envy you that you\u2019ve already had winter and are about to exit. I think we\u2019re entering it.<\/p>\n<p>Let me start off with this question, kind of to set the stage. The Forest Stewardship Council was built 30 years ago for a linear economy. You wanted to track responsible extraction and use of wood fiber, and you have these consumer-facing labels on paper and other products that a lot of our listeners are familiar with. But what I wanted to know is, how is the organization and its membership changing as you enter the era of circular economies of wood fiber?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>5:38<\/p>\n<p>I don\u2019t really think that I would call it changing. I would more call it evolving. Actually, the mission of FSC is the same as it\u2019s always been. We want to safeguard the forests of this world for the present and future generations. So as consumption increases and more and more of us are looking towards forests, we need to make sure that we can still keep that promise, and that means having to add new services to the FSC systems, new business models, new tools, so that we can ensure that fiber stays in use for longer, so that we can get to a stage where we are not over-utilizing our forests, but we have healthy ecosystems, and that the people that depend on forests are thriving too.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>6:23<\/p>\n<p>Talk a little more about making fiber go longer. Each time we use or reuse fiber, it gets shorter and so less resilient and able to support the use. What does that look like in practice? Now, how are we reusing fiber, and where do you think we\u2019re taking it?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>6:39<\/p>\n<p>Well, there\u2019s not one way, because reuse of fiber is going on in so many different industries. So it can be anything from the paper industry, where you would normally dissolve the pulp\u2014so you would dissolve the paper, and then you would make it into this very wet mass that you can then add new wood fibers to, and then you can create new paper. And on average, you can do that 17 times in a row before the fiber becomes too short.<\/p>\n<p>Essentially, in other areas, like in the construction sector, you could take the wood element just as it is and reuse it. So instead of recycling it and taking it through a whole manufacturing process, you could actually just reuse it as it is, especially if it\u2019s part of a construction that has been isolated inside a construction. For example, you can easily just reuse it as it is, without making it shorter.<\/p>\n<p>Then you have furniture. Furniture can have multiple lives and be repaired and refurbished and reused again. And we see that for high-quality furniture already. So it\u2019s a question of getting more of those circular loops up and running, and then designing them so that we keep the products on as high a level of quality as we can for as long as possible. So essentially, actually setting up systems that avoid shortening the fiber. That\u2019s what we\u2019re after, so that we can use them for longer.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>8:05<\/p>\n<p>What would a system that avoided shortening fibers consist of that we aren\u2019t potentially using today?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>8:13<\/p>\n<p>Well, in essence, it\u2019s about what are the rules? Which kinds of fibers do we allow for which types of use? For example, if you have a single-use product that you know will only have a very short lifetime\u2014that could be food wrapping, that will be contaminated by food and therefore you can\u2019t reuse the fiber afterwards. It could be paper straws, those kinds of things where you know it can only have one life\u2014it\u2019s asking ourselves, what fibers are we using for that one life? What is the quality of that fiber? What is the amount of recycled content that we require in that product?<\/p>\n<p>It\u2019s those kinds of things that I think we will need to have both regulatory rules on\u2014so legislation, essentially\u2014but we will also need to have systems, both in terms of what do certification systems like FSC do, but also, what does industry do? What are the industry standards? How will we circulate fiber? So it\u2019s very big and it\u2019s very fluffy, but it\u2019s those kind of things that we will need to start getting this more circular setup and running.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>9:22<\/p>\n<p>You make an important point. This is not a clear, bright, linear explanation. It\u2019s a fuzzy, circular system that we are seeking to evolve as we continue to become a more industrialized society. So let me ask you a question about how you\u2019re talking with industry about this. Are you positioning circularity as a way to respond to and manage that 400% demand surge that we\u2019re expecting over the next several decades, or is this a mechanism to, in their eyes, actually reduce total extraction?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>9:52<\/p>\n<p>Oh, it\u2019s not about reducing harvest. Actually, in reality, the hardcore reality of this is that there just will not be enough. We keep pretending that forests are this infinite resource that we can just go in and take as much out of as we want, but the reality is that we\u2019re just using up forest resources far, far faster than the forest can actually regenerate and grow new trees. And with more and more industries pivoting towards forest-based fibers\u2014in particular, that\u2019s anything from the construction sector to the textile industries to even the car industry\u2014all of them are looking towards forests because they have to replace their fossil fuel\u2013based products. So we know that the demand is only going to go up. You\u2019ve mentioned the number, the 400% increase. That\u2019s the projection from the World Bank.<\/p>\n<p>So we just need to be realistic about this and have ends meet, in essence, so that we don\u2019t get to a point where we\u2019re taking out trees so fast that the ecosystem can\u2019t keep up. Because if we\u2019re taking out trees from the forest faster than the ecosystem can keep up, that forest will be much more vulnerable to all of the climate-related events that it will also have to withstand. So the forest fires, the droughts, the beetle attacks, et cetera. If the ecosystem is weakened, it can\u2019t withstand those other alternative threats that it\u2019s going to be exposed to.<\/p>\n<p>So for me, it\u2019s just common sense. We have to get to a point where we are on a level of harvest that the forest can withstand, and we can only do that if we circulate fibers more and if we take better care of the things that we have. And the thing is, we used to be able to do this. If you look back to the \u201930s, the \u201920s, the \u201940s, the \u201950s, we knew how to repair things. Our parents knew how to do this. My grandmother knew how to mend all of her clothes. My father knew how to repair a broken radio or a bicycle or a light. And it\u2019s an ability that we lost because of just an abundance of access to things. So we need to get back to being able to have those circular loops and being more respectful about the resources that we are getting, and that is both as individuals and as societies.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>12:13<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s such an important point\u2014that we know how to do this, that we\u2019ve done it before, but we\u2019ve been trained out of this. How do you see FSC\u2014and you mentioned this earlier\u2014coaching people on the effective ways of making fiber last longer? Is this going to be a big messaging undertaking? Is it better labeling? How do you describe that challenge?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>12:35<\/p>\n<p>Everything at once? Yeah, it\u2019s everything at once. It\u2019s both how we communicate, how we position the value of forest products, how we position the value of a healthy ecosystem, how we reintroduce pride in repairing stuff and keeping things in loop. But it\u2019s also a question of, what do we have in terms of our standards? How do our standards support companies and encourage companies in setting up circular business models? How do we guide companies to moving towards more products-as-a-service, where it\u2019s not the actual product that you sell, but it\u2019s the service that the product gives? How do we create tools that make that transition easier?<\/p>\n<p>So it\u2019s a lot of different elements that we have to provide, and it\u2019s for a lot of different audiences. People often come to me and say, \u201cWell, nobody\u2019s asking for circularity, so therefore it\u2019s not a thing. People don\u2019t want FSC to work on circularity.\u201d And then I say, \u201cWell, they want us to safeguard ecosystems. They want us to support them in upcoming regulation on extended producer responsibility, for example. They want us to help them adhere to the waste directives that are coming out, not only in Europe, but also in Latin America and North America in some states of the US, and it\u2019s also there in Canada. They want us to help them figure out how they\u2019re going to handle the fact that they can\u2019t get the same amount of raw materials that they used to be able to just buy from any of their suppliers that they wanted, because all of a sudden half of it is gone in a forest fire. They want us to take care of all of that, and all of that is very closely tied to circular economy.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>14:17<\/p>\n<p>An important point too is that it\u2019s going to get more expensive as resources are strained, and that seems to be the underlying driver. But then you get back to the question of, how do you certify reuse? And you\u2019ve got\u2014it\u2019s no simple task. It requires a royalty system for forest owners, recognition of non-forest bio-based fibers blended with bio-based fibers, cascading use tools\u2014you know, in other words, things to track that fiber through multiple uses. What\u2019s the state of the technology? What of those things are on track to have an impact in the next half decade, for instance?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>14:53<\/p>\n<p>Oh, many of them are. Some are, of course, much more doable than others. So for example, the lowest-hanging fruit for companies in FSC is to introduce circular business models into our chain-of-custody standard. That standard covers 70,000 companies around the globe already. So if we enable in that standard that they are able to do take-back, or they\u2019re able to do repair and leasing, and we guide them and give them best practices as to how they can do that\u2014well, that\u2019s very easy and straightforward, and in fact, we\u2019re doing that already. It\u2019s in consultation right now, set to be implemented by the end of this year.<\/p>\n<p>The other one that we\u2019re also already working on is, what is the role of agricultural residues in FSC-certified products? So could we enable agricultural residues? Think wheat straw. Think rice husks\u2014so the shells around rice. Think coffee chaff\u2014from after you\u2019re done with producing coffee, you have all the silver skin lying back. All of that is being used right now primarily for local energy production. What if all of that could actually replace virgin forest fibers in all of the pulp-based products? What if we could require that that was certified to a credible agricultural standard, and we could then give it a different value? That\u2019s what we\u2019re also building a framework for right now, and we\u2019ll be piloting so that we could enable those products to have a longer life, while also reducing the requirement or the demand for virgin forest fiber, and therefore reducing pressure on forests. So those are some of the really low-hanging fruits.<\/p>\n<p>Then, of course, the whole cascading principles, which is for a lot of people a tricky word\u2014because what does that mean? In essence, it means, how do we make sure that fibers stay in as high a quality for as long as they can possibly be? It\u2019s quite easy when you explain it as: if you think of a wooden log, how can you keep that wooden log in long, long timber beams for as long as possible before you break them down into smaller pieces of wood, then into wood chips, potentially, then into fiber pulp? Essentially, because once you\u2019ve broken them down, you can\u2019t put them back together.<\/p>\n<p>That is a more tricky thing, because we don\u2019t have rules in FSC right now about what we do on this. So essentially, you could, if you wanted, take a tree straight out of the forest and make it into wood chips and burn it for energy production. So one of the things that we\u2019re looking into is, well, how can we create incentives so that isn\u2019t the way that it\u2019s done? How can we create tools that would enable companies to actually communicate to their supply chain which type of fibers that they want and which kind of quality, so that it matches the type of product that they\u2019re creating\u2014both in terms of what are the technical specifications of that product, like what is the strength of the fiber that they actually need in the product for that product to perform well, but also, what is the expected lifetime duration for that product? Because if it\u2019s a very short-lived product, we shouldn\u2019t be using very high-quality fibers to produce it. And then, of course, also, what would the role be of recycled fiber in those particular products? And should there be rules? Should there be incentives for increasing the use of recycled fiber in them? So all of these things are things we\u2019re working on right now.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>18:26<\/p>\n<p>Let me double-click on something that you were just talking about\u2014this notion of the producer, the initial producer, benefiting over the course of many generations. And that royalty concept, I think, is really one of the most novel things that is called out in the papers you shared with me. It envisions a forest owner\u2014a Weyerhaeuser or Boise Cascade, for instance\u2014thinking of a tree as an annuity, to a degree. But then there\u2019s this challenge of how you track it through the entire life cycle, which in my mind is a lot like some of the discussions we\u2019re having about intellectual property in the age of AI. This stuff kind of has a tendency to disappear into the industrial economy and be forgotten. But this royalty system\u2014how can that be implemented? And what\u2019s the incentive for a company to pay the fee that creates the annuity for the original producer?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>19:22<\/p>\n<p>So first and foremost, maybe we need to back up a second and explain what the royalty system is, because I\u2019m assuming that the listener won\u2019t actually know. So the royalty system is the most pie-in-the-sky concept that we have in the things that we\u2019re working on. So this is my baby, my big dream. I don\u2019t know whether we will ever be able to implement it, but I really want to get there.<\/p>\n<p>So essentially, what the concept is, is that we are right now paying forest owners only for harvesting trees. But in reality, they\u2019re taking care of so much more. When they\u2019re managing their forest sustainably, they\u2019re making sure that the ecosystem is healthy. They\u2019re protecting biodiversity. They\u2019re protecting wildlife. They\u2019re taking care of a lot of social elements\u2014for example, indigenous peoples\u2019 rights as part of that forest management. But we don\u2019t pay them for that. We don\u2019t reward them for all of that work, all of what they\u2019re doing that actually helps us fight climate change in quite a significant way.<\/p>\n<p>So the whole concept is, if we imagine a world where fibers are circulating for more than one use, what would the incentive be for a forest owner to actually maintain their forest healthy, because we only pay them when they cut the tree? Well, what if we could pay them every single time that product\u2014the fiber from their forest\u2014goes through another use round, another recycled loop, or another reuse loop? What if they could get a small fee as a token for their continued protection of that forest ecosystem and the social safeguards? That is the big dream, the overarching concept.<\/p>\n<p>You\u2019re then asking, well, why would companies pay for that? Well, because companies are faced with increased legislative requirements, not just in the EU but globally. We see bioeconomy frameworks, we see extended producer responsibility. We see waste and resource management requirements. We see social compliance data being required from them. Green claims\u2014which is, how are you promoting your products? We see requirements for product data and origin data as part of digital product passports. And on top of that, we see an increased amount of required data from impact investors and from sustainable finance.<\/p>\n<p>So if you\u2019re using a secondary product\u2014something that has already been in use once\u2014how would you know all of those core data points, unless you have some way to get access to them? So the whole theory is that these companies would be willing to pay a small fee for access to the origin data about that product. That could be data about the social compliance, pesticide use, chemical use, the origin, the status of the biodiversity where it originates from, et cetera. So that would be things that they would pay a small fee for into an automated system, and the fee that they pay then actually goes back to the forest owner as a payment for their continued protection of the forest.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>22:29<\/p>\n<p>So in the long term, obviously the price of wood fiber is going to increase. It just does. But by paying this fee, we can reduce the pace at which the price rises\u2014is that the basic mechanism that we\u2019re talking about?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>22:46<\/p>\n<p>No, I don\u2019t think so. Not necessarily, no. It doesn\u2019t actually have to do with the first use round. What it would be doing is that you introduce this fee, and it gives an additional value for the forest owner to safeguard the forest over time, but it also removes a very big data barrier for the company who pays the fee. And we\u2019re not talking large fees here. The whole concept is that it should be very, very small, so it should still be worthwhile for the company buying access to the data to pay that fee. So it\u2019s similar to the FSC fees that we have for certification today, which is also only a fraction of their annual turnover for the wood-based products.<\/p>\n<p>So the fee should be small enough that you would pay for access, but when you aggregate that over all of the times that the forest has harvested, then it also becomes a significant sum for the forest owner. So that\u2019s the whole concept\u2014that\u2019s not actually meddling with the price for the raw material in the first instance.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>23:53<\/p>\n<p>Okay, we have opened\u2014well, let\u2019s call it an FSC-certified box\u2014and there\u2019s a lot inside. I think we\u2019ve laid the foundation for the rest of the conversation, but folks, we\u2019re going to take a quick commercial break and we\u2019re going to be right back. Stay tuned.<\/p>\n<p>Welcome back to <em>Sustainability In Your Ear<\/em>. Now, let\u2019s get back to my conversation with Loa Dalgaard Worm. She is Circularity Hub Lead for the <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/\">Forest Stewardship Council<\/a>. Loa, what we\u2019re describing is FSC acting as a central data hub and a payment facilitator in this royalty environment that you\u2019re describing. Basically, you become a platform company as well as a certification body. So the question I\u2019m wrestling with is, how do you make sure the platform costs don\u2019t ultimately consume the fees that are intended to become the royalty payments for forest owners?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>24:43<\/p>\n<p>Well, the truth is that we are already, as FSC, on this trajectory of becoming a platform company. So we have a lot of the infrastructure already. We already run <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/en\/fsctrace\">FSC Trace<\/a>, which is a blockchain that can carry all of the data points that I was talking about before. We also already do earth observation and fiber testing. So we\u2019re already collaborating with partners like <a href=\"https:\/\/worldforestid.org\/\">World Forest ID<\/a>, who is the leading entity in the field of doing fiber testing and forensic testing of where fibers come from. We already do work with <a href=\"https:\/\/www.esri.com\/en-us\/industries\/forestry\/overview\">Esri<\/a>, who is an earth observation company.<\/p>\n<p>So what we would need to build on top is the payment system and the automated systems. And as I have pointed out before, this is just a big dream. So I don\u2019t know whether this will be a reality, whether we will succeed in the end. And I\u2019m very much aware that we will need the right people around the table to help us build this elegantly so that we don\u2019t see admin costs eating up the whole thing. Because for me, this is very important, but actually that is what I\u2019m least worried about. It\u2019s not that cost will eat it up.<\/p>\n<p>I think actually one of the things that will be more tricky is getting forests around the world mapped with isotope testing in a grid that\u2019s fine enough for us to tell where a product likely comes from in a second or a third loop. So let me explain that a bit.<\/p>\n<p>If you think about forest-based products, the easy ones are like the chairs, the tables, where it\u2019s solid wood, and those you could just slap a barcode on, and once they\u2019re being reused, you can scan that barcode, and it\u2019s not that difficult to figure out where it was from. But if you have a mixed-fiber product, or if you have a pulp-based product, that means that you have reduced the fiber into being very, very short pulp segments. If you then need to figure out in the second or third loop which forest actually delivered pulp into this product, you will need to do fiber testing to figure out where it came from, and you could do that through what is called isotope testing.<\/p>\n<p>Every living thing on this planet, even plants and animals, have isotopes in them. We also have them as human beings. And the beauty of isotopes is that roughly every 15 kilometers they shift slightly, which means that if you have enough samples from around the globe, that sort of creates a grid of what an isotope looks like in every single 15-kilometer grid of the globe. Then if you do a test of a product, of a fiber batch, then you can tell what isotope shows up there, and where it belongs on the globe.<\/p>\n<p>And for me, getting that fine grid of the reference samples\u2014that\u2019s the real challenge. That\u2019s where we will really need to roll up our sleeves, because there\u2019s nothing even close to it. And the beauty of it is that if we manage to create that grid, we could not only implement the royalty system, we could also make that grid available for all of the competent authorities\u2014the authorities around the globe\u2014to help combat illegal logging, because all of a sudden you could see where forest products are coming from, and therefore whether they are from an illegally logged area.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>28:01<\/p>\n<p>There\u2019s a lot of benefits in this. Are these technologies proven only in the lab, or are any of them in use in the field now?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>28:09<\/p>\n<p>No, they\u2019re already being used and have been used for quite a while. So I mentioned <a href=\"https:\/\/worldforestid.org\/\">World Forest ID<\/a>. They\u2019re the leading entity in this. FSC helped institute them, I think five or six years back. But even before then, these technologies were being used very widely. So big companies use them to test whether the products that they\u2019re buying, especially from some regions in the world, are actually from where they\u2019re said to be, and that they\u2019re actually containing the type of forest-based fiber that they\u2019re set to contain. So for example: Is it the species that I\u2019m thinking that I\u2019m buying that I\u2019m actually buying?<\/p>\n<p>Then authorities are also using it for law enforcement around the world already. So that could be from the American <a href=\"https:\/\/www.fs.usda.gov\/about-agency\/international-programs\/WISC\">Lacey Act<\/a>, which has a lot of different wood species that you cannot import into the US. It could also be the Australian ban, which is also a ban on specific species that cannot be used in Australia. And then there\u2019s the <a href=\"https:\/\/environment.ec.europa.eu\/topics\/forests\/deforestation\/regulation-deforestation-free-products_en\">European Timber Regulation<\/a>, which requires that you know what type of species is in your products before you place it on the EU market, and they\u2019re already using them in their everyday operations.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>29:16<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s really good to hear. We have the technologies. It\u2019s organizing the information, as you\u2019ve described, that\u2019s the key. You know, I visited the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.fpl.fs.usda.gov\/\">United States Forest Service Forest Products Lab<\/a> last year, and one of the things that they were showing us was compressed wood products made from a lot of scrap. I can imagine the kind of tracking you\u2019re talking about for early in the multiple-reuse life cycle being pretty easy to identify, but when things get mixed up, like the fibers in paper\u2014will this also be applicable?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>29:47<\/p>\n<p>Yeah, see, and that\u2019s the tricky part, right? So the easy part will be for us to start out with the solid wood products, and the benefit of doing that is it would also benefit the forests of the Global South, where we really need this system up and running as fast as we can to safeguard those forests from deforestation, because a lot of those fibers end up in solid wood products.<\/p>\n<p>For the fiber products that you talk about\u2014so paper or compressed wood and fiberboard, et cetera\u2014it\u2019s more difficult. What we are contemplating there is, well, what if it isn\u2019t this exact forest that we can track back to, but it\u2019s this region, it\u2019s this approximate area? Because we can tell that. It\u2019s just that for paper products, it might be a thousand forests. But what if we could create a system where the fee that you get is proportional to the likelihood that part of the product was delivered from part of your forest, essentially? So that it becomes more of a credit system or a mass balance system in the end\u2014which, and maybe we would need a combination of both\u2014so that there\u2019s still a better, bigger benefit for the ones who have solid wood products. But that\u2019s a lot of the stuff that we have to figure out. Like I said, it\u2019s early stages. We\u2019re still in dreamland for this one.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>31:05<\/p>\n<p>It is, but that probabilistic analysis that you\u2019re describing is what we\u2019re working towards with quantum computing as a processing platform for this kind of information. It\u2019s interesting to think about whether or not we\u2019ve already been inventing the solutions to the problems we have and just haven\u2019t found the applications for those solutions yet. You\u2019re describing one that I hadn\u2019t thought of before.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>31:26<\/p>\n<p>I hadn\u2019t thought of quantum computing in this context either, but it\u2019s really interesting.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>31:32<\/p>\n<p>One of the assumptions that I hear in the conversation and in the papers that I read is that transparency requirements are going to continue to get more stringent. But the current regulatory momentum in Brussels may shift, and obviously in Washington, it already has. How robust do you see the business case for these solutions if the regulatory tailwind stalls?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>31:54<\/p>\n<p>Well, there\u2019s a very\u2014perhaps a subtle but a very important\u2014detail about the deregulation that\u2019s happening right now. Because it is true that we\u2019re seeing deregulation happening and seeing a lot of legislation being changed or pulled back or adapted. But what we\u2019re seeing being adapted through deregulation is very much focused on what we can call the \u201cdo good\u201d regulation\u2014so the ambitious regulations that are pushing the world in a more sustainable direction. That is very unfortunate. They\u2019re being impacted big time right now and being dismantled in many different regions, many different countries of the world.<\/p>\n<p>But at the same time, we have a geopolitical situation which means that every single region of this world wants to become resource resilient. They want to be self-reliant, both in terms of their financial stability and in terms of their trade, but also in terms of their access to raw material and the continued ability to produce the goods that are needed in a given region. That creates a very strong push for circular business models. So that could be recycling, that could be reuse, it could be looped material, raw material handling, so you have to use products again and again. And we\u2019re seeing more and more legislation coming up pushing for reuse.<\/p>\n<p>But when you reuse the product or fiber the second time, you still need to know that it\u2019s safe. You need to know that it\u2019s not from illegal sources. You need to know that it hasn\u2019t contributed to human rights violations, and you need to know which kind of pesticides and chemicals were used in it. And those are the legislations that we are actually seeing being firmed up right now and implemented faster right now, instead of being removed. So the whole transparency rollback actually isn\u2019t happening for these types of more circular loops.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>33:46<\/p>\n<p>You point out in the papers I read, too, that there\u2019s at least a dozen EU regulations or global standards that the royalty system could actually support and streamline compliance reporting for. And that, of course, is what a lot of companies are looking for\u2014greater efficiency in that kind of reporting. But there are stalled regulations as well, like the EU Deforestation Regulation, which would require you track the wood coming into the continent. Practically speaking, what are the specific reporting burdens that you can help reduce by adding this data to the circular economy information flow that we\u2019re trying to build?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>34:23<\/p>\n<p>So the whole beauty of what we\u2019re trying to do here, both with the royalty system but also with the circular economy module that we\u2019re looking into\u2014with the FSC, we have an EUDR add-on module which is called the regulatory module. And the beauty is that a lot of data points that companies need for adherence to these legislations\u2014and it\u2019s not just European ones. I gave European examples. It could also be the new Brazilian Circular Act. It could be the Mexican new legislation that was just enforced here in January\u2014a lot of the data points that they\u2019re asking for are data points which we\u2019re already monitoring.<\/p>\n<p>We already have audits in every single forest, in every single factory that is working with FSC. But what we don\u2019t have is a system for connecting those data points with the product that is then again tied to an origin. So in other words, we don\u2019t have a fiber test which can already prove\u2014or, it\u2019s not that we have the fiber test, but it\u2019s not a systemic part of our system\u2014that can prove automatically that this piece of timber came from that forest and has been exposed to these chemicals or to these pesticides, et cetera. And here is the audit report that shows how the workers were fairly paid or safe, and that no indigenous peoples were harmed and that they gave consent to their land management.<\/p>\n<p>So that\u2019s the piece that we\u2019re missing\u2014that we need to have that system. And if we have that system for the first use case, which is what we are implementing with FSC Trace and with the regulatory module, we really are very close to being able to also use that system for multiple use cycles. Which means that the admin burden for the companies is actually relatively low, because a lot of the data points are things that they\u2019re already giving to us as part of their annual audit. We just have to use it better and put it to more uses than we\u2019re doing today.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>36:27<\/p>\n<p>We\u2019re building a very complex network. And obviously you and I are speaking halfway around the world, but in the Global North. And as I think about what you\u2019re saying\u2014how do we ensure that we don\u2019t create a mechanism that primarily benefits the well-resourced forest operations in the Global North? I mean, will you have a subsidy or a low-cost onboarding solution for organizations and communities in the Global South to help them participate in this economic opportunity?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>36:54<\/p>\n<p>So this is one of the key focus areas of FSC as such, and something that\u2019s really close to our hearts\u2014how do we constantly have alternative ways so that we don\u2019t add a burden for the Global South, and that we give them access, and that we have something that\u2019s attractive all around the globe, not just in the more digitally driven Global North?<\/p>\n<p>The reality is that right now, most fibers actually don\u2019t travel continents. And in the future, with the geopolitical situation, I don\u2019t think that they will travel continents more than they do today. So there are some things that FSC won\u2019t be able to fix. In terms of Global South\u2013Global North, we need to have stronger legislation and stronger enforcement, especially in the Global South, to safeguard the ecosystems there even more.<\/p>\n<p>But what we can do as FSC is we can make systems that automate as much of the data requirements and data gathering as we can, and that do not add on additional data elements\u2014like the ones I was talking about before\u2014that we need to utilize what we\u2019re actually already out there gathering. And then I think we need to really think about the fact that we have boots on the ground every single year as part of our audits. How do we utilize those boots elegantly? How much of the data could an auditor actually contribute as part of the audit, instead of asking the forest owner or the company in the Global South to do it, unless their systems already do it?<\/p>\n<p>Because let\u2019s not stigmatize and say that everyone in the Global South is not using computers and doesn\u2019t have elegant systems. Some of them are more advanced than we are. But for the ones that are small, the ones that are community-driven, the ones that are much more analog\u2014and where this is difficult\u2014well, what is the role of the auditor who\u2019s there anyway to help ensure that that information gets on the systems that it needs to get on?<\/p>\n<p>Then, of course, a lot of it is also about making it mobile-first. Because while they might not have fancy LIDAR systems and earth observations and integration with harvesting machines, et cetera, like we see in the Global North, all of them have cell phones. So how can we make sure that the cell phone, the smartphone in their hand, can be actually utilized to access the very same systems in an elegant way that does not require a lot of additional time, but gives them access to the benefits?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>39:28<\/p>\n<p>You\u2019re correct. There are a lot of communities in the Global South that leapfrog the hard-wired infrastructure that the North built first, and therefore are ahead of us in a lot of ways. But could I have a couple more questions on that? They require an impressionistic answer. And the first is, can you describe a program that would support an indigenous community working to care for their forest and its biodiversity? How would that potentially be enabled by the system that you\u2019re building?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>39:57<\/p>\n<p>Well, in many senses, the indigenous communities are already doing what we\u2019re asking for. They\u2019re safeguarding 80% of the remaining biodiversity that we have on this globe, regardless of the fact that they\u2019re only 10% of the population. So they are already taking care of the ecosystems in a way that all of the rest of us are not doing.<\/p>\n<p>What we have in FSC is we really have an embedded adherence to the concept of free, prior, and informed consent, which is actually a human right, but we\u2019re one of the few entities actually enforcing it\u2014making sure that indigenous people are not only informed about what is going on on their land, but that they\u2019re done so in advance, before something happens on their land, and that they give consent and also have the right to withdraw that consent.<\/p>\n<p>Well, what if these systems could also make sure that we capitalize what they\u2019re already doing on the ground? The way that they are protecting the biodiversity\u2014what if we could get more of the data and the impact and learn from them, and take some of that learning and use it in other forest areas around the world, which is something that we\u2019re not totally bad at doing? So what if we could learn from some of the data elements that they have, and that they have the exact same access as the rest of the forest owners, the rest of the stewards, to some of the fees that are being paid back? It won\u2019t be a silver bullet, but at least we could give some more payment for the protection of ecosystems that they\u2019re already stewarding on behalf of essentially the globe.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>41:44<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s a very forthright answer. I appreciate it. It is such a challenge to integrate the kinds of indigenous understanding of the environment that we lost because we have treated the environment as something separate from us\u2014that these indigenous communities continue to preserve. You\u2019ve been very generous with your time and your thinking. One last question: How would you describe a fully circular fiber economy changing global supply chains, and when do you think that becomes common?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>42:16<\/p>\n<p>Well, it really depends on what we mean. Because fully circular global supply chains can come in many shapes and forms.<\/p>\n<p>Okay, well, if you\u2019re asking about the royalty system, which I know is one of the things that you\u2019re really interested in\u2014I do hope that we have something to pilot within the next two years and can make it into a more mature concept at our next General Assembly in FSC in three years, for debate. Because FSC is a membership-driven organization, so everything has to go to debate there before we implement at scale.<\/p>\n<p>But the royalty system isn\u2019t the only thing that can push for this shift towards circular supply chains. It\u2019s just a small fraction of what we\u2019re doing. So if you\u2019re asking more broadly about the way that the world uses fibers and how we view fibers, I think if we had this conversation in five years, we would have a fundamentally different perspective on fiber use, fiber value, and how we so easily throw things out right now. I think in five years, that will be fundamentally different, both from organizations but also from consumers.<\/p>\n<p>I think that global supply chains will be forced to look much more locally when they\u2019re focusing on fiber sourcing. And they have to really both use more local fibers and look very carefully into redistributing and enabling closed-loop systems, because geopolitics is just pushing very rapidly in that direction. So it\u2019s going much faster than anybody was expecting.<\/p>\n<p>So I think if we look ahead just within a year, we will start seeing these circular business models having an uptake in FSC. If we look five years ahead, hopefully all of our different initiatives that I\u2019ve been talking about today are either in pilot mode or implementation mode, so that we can become an enabler for a circular economy. And for me personally, that is the end goal. We have to enable a circular economy so we can reduce pressure on forests, so forests can help us fight climate change, and we have a realistic chance of having a climate that we as human beings can survive in.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>44:42<\/p>\n<p>Loa, I hope that all of that is something that comes to pass. Thank you for your time today. It\u2019s been a fascinating conversation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Loa Dalgaard Worm\u00a0 <\/strong>44:48<\/p>\n<p>Well, you\u2019re most welcome.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Mitch Ratcliffe\u00a0 <\/strong>44:56<\/p>\n<p>Welcome back to <em>Sustainability In Your Ear<\/em>. You\u2019ve been listening to my conversation with Loa Dalgaard Worm, who is the leader of the <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/en\/circularity\">Circularity Hub<\/a> at the <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/\">Forest Stewardship Council<\/a>. Her team is taking on the biggest expansion of the FSC mission since the chain-of-custody certification program it started 30 years ago. And to find out more about the Circularity Hub, you can visit <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/en\/circularity\">fsc.org\/circularity<\/a>, or contact the team by email at <a href=\"mailto:circularity@fsc.org\">circularity@fsc.org<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>We heard one thing clearly in this conversation, something that\u2019s reiterated by many of our guests: data can help us plan and transform the economy. We can see into the complexity that we\u2019ve created around ourselves and, to a degree, are being carried away by. The future of materials, forests, and the circular economy depends on data platforms that can help manage information about everything that we produce and use, and that\u2014at least until now\u2014we throw away.<\/p>\n<p>The economics of forest fiber won\u2019t work under the current linear system, and the cost is rising. You can see it everywhere. For example, the Trump administration recently announced plans to open old-growth forests in Oregon to logging. We are literally preparing to mow down the last reserves of biodiversity in the United States. This is insanity.<\/p>\n<p>Loa is right. We act as if forests are endless resources, but we\u2019re taking fiber much faster than forests can recover. Weakened ecosystems cannot withstand the fires, droughts, and beetle outbreaks that are being made worse by climate change every year. This outdated way of thinking from past centuries is leading us toward disaster. We have to face this reality in our supply chains. If industries don\u2019t start reusing, repairing, and recirculating fiber, they will run out of the material that they hope will replace plastics. The sad truth is that if the green transition doesn\u2019t face up to this problem, the forest loss will actually accelerate, because we haven\u2019t changed the basic economic models behind reuse.<\/p>\n<p>Loa\u2019s idea for a royalty system is one of the most creative approaches that I\u2019ve seen in certification design. Right now, forest owners are paid only once, and that\u2019s when they cut down a tree. The royalty idea would give them a small payment each time fiber from their forest is reused, whether as solid wood in construction, repaired furniture, or as paper that\u2019s recycled many times. Loa called this her \u201cpie-in-the-sky\u201d idea. But tracking technology is advancing fast. FSC already uses a blockchain-based system called <a href=\"https:\/\/fsc.org\/en\/fsctrace\">FSC Trace<\/a>, works with the <a href=\"https:\/\/worldforestid.org\/\">World Forest ID<\/a> program to use isotope testing that can pinpoint a fiber\u2019s origin to within about 15 kilometers, and partners with <a href=\"https:\/\/www.esri.com\/en-us\/industries\/forestry\/overview\">Esri<\/a> to improve earth observation systems so we can predict forestry outcomes instead of just reacting to what happens.<\/p>\n<p>For solid wood, tracking through several uses is fairly simple. The real shift is moving from just enforcing rules and catching illegal timber\u2014which is always going to be needed\u2014to actually rewarding the ongoing care that keeps forests healthy. FSC needs to make sure that incentives reach the Global South too, or the circular economy could end up mainly helping large forestry companies in the North.<\/p>\n<p>Because of geopolitics, fiber sourcing is shifting toward local and regional supplies. Countries are putting up walls, so most fiber will stay within continents. FSC can support inclusion for indigenous peoples by automating data collection to avoid creating extra work for local communities, using existing auditors to gather information that small or community-run forests can\u2019t easily digitize, and by creating mobile tools that work on smartphones. Indigenous peoples already care for 80% of the world\u2019s remaining biodiversity, and they don\u2019t need lessons in circular forest management, because they\u2019ve practiced it for dozens of generations. But the royalty system Loa is developing could finally pay those communities for their stewardship, instead of treating it as a free benefit to the global economy\u2014which corporate finance so loves to overlook.<\/p>\n<p>So here\u2019s what I want you to leave with after this conversation. Loa said something that I think we all know but too often ignore due to the industrial way of thinking: we once knew how to live in a circular way without sending so much waste to landfill every year. Our grandparents fixed clothes. They repaired radios. They kept things in use. FSC\u2019s circularity work aims to rebuild the systems we need to relearn reuse and repair.<\/p>\n<p>The question is whether FSC\u2019s royalty system will move from idea to pilot within Loa\u2019s two-year goal. That will show whether or not certification organizations can adapt quickly enough to help create a circular bioeconomy, instead of just recording the failure of the old, wasteful system. The ambition is there, the tools are ready, and the real question is whether institutions and markets will act fast enough for the forests.<\/p>\n<p>So stay tuned. We\u2019re going to have more discussions about this, especially about the solutions that can make a difference on <em>Sustainability In Your Ear<\/em>. And I hope you\u2019ll take a moment to check out our archive of more than 540 episodes, because there\u2019s something here. We\u2019re in our sixth season, and I guarantee you that there\u2019s an interview you\u2019re going to want to share with one of your friends. Writing a review on your favorite podcast platform will help your neighbors find us. Because folks, you are the amplifiers that can spread more ideas to create less waste. Please tell your friends, family, and co-workers. They can find us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Audible, or whatever purveyor of podcast goodness they prefer.<\/p>\n<p>Thank you for your support. I\u2019m Mitch Ratcliffe. This is <em>Sustainability In Your Ear<\/em>, and we will be back with another innovator interview soon. In the meantime, folks, take care of yourself, take care of one another, and let\u2019s all take care of this beautiful planet of ours. Have a green day.<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>The post <a href=\"https:\/\/earth911.com\/podcast\/sustainability-in-your-ear-the-forest-stewardship-councils-path-to-a-circular-bio-based-future-with-loa-dalgaard-worm\/\">Sustainability In Your Ear: The Forest Stewardship Councils\u2019 Path to a Circular Bio-based Future with Loa Dalgaard Worm<\/a> appeared first on <a href=\"https:\/\/earth911.com\">Earth911<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Forests are vital for people everywhere. They cover about 4.14 billion hectares, roughly a third of the world\u2019s land, and store 714 gigatons of carbon. They also support 80% of land-based biodiversity. However, we are losing 11 million hectares each year to deforestation, and the World Bank expects demand for forest-based products to rise by&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":5133,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[14],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5131"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5131"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5131\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5135,"href":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5131\/revisions\/5135"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5133"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5131"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5131"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/baldheadedgirls.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5131"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}