Learning to Become an FSC Auditor
Objectivity, Interpretation, and Mastery
This paper aims to open up the black box of auditing for the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) forest management standard. Specifically, we delve into the early steps of becoming an FSC auditor by examining two auditor training sessions in northern Europe. Using a mix of participant observation and unstructured interviews, the paper subjects the trainings to analysis focusing on the ways in which trainees are taught to become FSC experts. Alongside being an exploratory piece on the nature of FSC auditor training, we show how auditing expertise is a matter of performing objectivity and how interpretation is a key aspect of these performances. Learning how to do interpretation, and what values should guide this interpretation, is part of the training but also poses a challenge to the teachers because these aspects cannot be seen to impinge on the objectivity of auditing. We suggest that the mitigation of these tensions during the performance of objectivity is the hallmark of auditing expertise. We conclude our analysis by discussing expertise as a matter of reflecting on and aligning objectivity, values, and interpretation.
Accreditation Services International (2017). Accreditation Services International. Available at: http://www.accreditation-services.com/archives/standards/fsc (accessed 01 September 2017)
Auld G and Bull G (2003) The institutional design of forest certification standards initiatives and its influence on the role of science: The case of forest genetic resources. Journal of Environmental Management 69(1): 47-62.
Auld G, Gulbrandsen L, and McDermott C (2008) Certification Schemes and the Impacts on Forests and Forestry. Annual Review of Environmental Resources 33: 187-211.
Bal R, Bijker W and Hendriks R (2002) Paradox van wetenschappelijk gezag. Over de maatschappelijke invloed van adviezen van de Gezondheidsraad.
Collins H and Evans R (2007) Rethinking Expertise. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Domingues P, Sampaio P and Arezes P (2011) Beyond "audit" definition : a framework proposal for integrated management systems. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Industrial Engineering Research Conference (eds Doolen T and Van Aken E), Reno, NV, USA.
Douglas H (2004) The Irreducible Complexity of Objectivity. Synthese 138(3): 453-473.
Douglas H (2009) Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Dreyfus H and Dreyfus S (2005) Peripheral Vision: Expertise in Real World Contexts. Organization Studies 26(5): 779-792.
Ebeling J and Yasué M (2009) The effectiveness of market-based conservation in the tropics: Forest certification in Ecuador and Bolivia. Journal of Environmental Management 90(2): 1145-1153.
Eden S (2008) Being fieldworthy: environmental knowledge practices and the space of the field in forest certification. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 26(6): 1018-1035.
Eyal G and Buchholz L (2010) From the Sociology of Intellectuals to the Sociology of Interventions. Annual Review of Sociology 36: 117-137.
Forest Stewardship Council (2016) FSC Procedures. Available at: https://ic.fsc.org/preview.fsc-pro-20-004-v1-2-en-general-requirements-for-an-fsc-training-programme.a-5679.pdf (accessed 14 September 2016)
Forest Stewardship Council (2017) FSC IC. Available at: https://ic.fsc.org/en/facts-and-figures (accessed on 01 September 2017)
Gilbert N and Mulkay M (1984) Opening Pandora's Box: A sociological analysis of scientists' discourse. Cambridge University Press.
Goffman E (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday Anchor Books.
Gupta A and Mason M (2014) A Transparency Turn in Global Environmental Governance. In: Gupta A, and Mason M (eds) Transparency in Global Environmental Governance. The MIT Press, pp. 240-287.
Hilgartner S (2000) Science on Stage: Expert Advice as Public Drama. Stanford, California: Standford University Press.
Konefal J and Hatanaka M (2011) Enacting third-party certification: A case study of science and politics. Journal of Rural Studies 27(2): 125-133.
Kotzee B (2014) Expertise, fluency and social realism about professional knowledge. Journal of Education and Work 27(2): 161-178
Law J (2009) Collateral Realities. In: Heterogeneities.net, John Law's STS Web Page. Available at: http://heterogeneities.net/publications/Law2009CollateralRealities.pdf (accessed 05.12.2013)
Maletz O and Tysiachniouk M (2009) The effect of expertise on the quality of forest standards implementation: The case of FSC forest certification in Russia. Forest Policy and Economics 11(5-6): 422-428.
McDermott C (2012) Trust, Legitimacy and Power in Forest Certification: A case study of the FSC in British Columbia. Geoforum 43(3): 634-644.
Mol A (2008) Environmental Reform in the Information Age: The contours of informational governance. Cambridge University Press.
Moore SE, Cubbage F and Eicheldinger C (2012) Impacts of Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI) Forest Certification in North America. Journal of Forestry 110(2): 79-88.
Pentland B (1993) Getting Comfortable with the numbers : Auditing and the micro-production of macro-order. Accounting Organisations and Society 18(7-8): 605-620.
Porter T (1995) Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton University Press.
Power M (1995) Auditing, expertise and the sociology of technique. Critical Prespectives on Auditing 6: 317-339
Power M (1997) The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. New York: Oxford University Press.
Strathern M (2000) The Tyranny of Transparency. British Educational Research Journal 26(3): 309-321.
Turnhout E, Neves K, and Lijster E (2014). 'Measurementality' in biodiversity governance: Knowledge, transparency, and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Environment and Planning A (46): 581-597.
Turnhout E, Skutsch M, & De Koning J (2016). Carbon Accounting. In K Bäckstrand, & E Lövbrand (Eds.). Research Handbook of Climate Governance. Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 273-317
Power M (2000) The Audit Society - Second Thoughts. International Journal of Auditing 4(1): 111-119.
Power M (2003) Auditing and the production of legitimacy. Accounting, Organizations and Society 28: 379-394.
Strathern M (2000) The Tyranny of Transparency. British Educational Research Journal 26(3): 309-321.
Turner S (2010) Normal Accidents in Expertise. Minerva 48(3): 239–258.
Yanow D (2015) After Mastery. In: Garud R, Simpson B, Langley A, and Tsoukas H (eds) The Emergence of Novelty in Organizations. Oxford University Press, pp. 273-317
Terms & Conditions
This Science & Technology Studies website ("Site") is owned and operated by The Finnish Society for Science and Technology Studies (“Society”). The Finnish Society for Science and Technology Studies and its publication Science & Technology Studies are non-profit organizations.
The Society reserves the right to change, modify, add or remove portions of these Terms and Conditions at its discretion at any time and without prior notice. Please check this page periodically for any modifications. Your continued use of this Site following the posting of any changes will mean that you have accepted the changes.
Copyrights and Limitations on Use
Content in this Site, including site layout, design, images, text and other information (collectively, the "Content") is the property of The Finnish Society for Science and Technology Studies/Science & Technology Studies and is protected by copyright and other intellectual property laws, unless otherwise noted. This does not include the articles that remain the copyright of the authors.
Content on this website is protected by Creative Commons license CC BY 4.0. This permits users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the published articles. Using and sharing the content is permitted as long as original materials are appropriately credited.
The Site may contain robot exclusion headers, and by using the Site you agree that you will not use any robots, spiders, crawlers or other automated downloading programs or devices to access, search, index, monitor or copy any Content. The harvesting of postal or email addresses from the Site for purposes of sending unsolicited or unauthorized commercial material, is prohibited. Any questions about whether a particular use is authorized and any requests for permission to publish, reproduce, distribute, display or make derivative works from any Content should be directed to the Science & Technology Studies Assistant Editor.
You may not use the services on the Site to publish or distribute any information (including software or other content) that is illegal; violates or infringes upon the rights of any other person; is abusive, hateful, profane, pornographic, threatening or vulgar; contains errors, viruses or other harmful components; or is otherwise actionable by law. Science & Technology Studies may at any time exercise editorial control over the content of any information or material that is submitted or distributed through its facilities and/or services.
You may not, without the approval of Science & Technology Studies, use the Site to publish or distribute any advertising, promotional material, or solicitation to other users of the Site to use any goods or services. For example (but without limitation), you may not use the Site to conduct any business, to solicit the performance of any activity that is prohibited by law, or to solicit other users to become subscribers of other information services. Similarly, you may not use the Site to download and redistribute public information or shareware for personal gain or use the facilities and/or services to distribute multiple copies of public domain information or shareware.
All trademarks appearing on this Site are the property of their respective owners.
Links to Other Sites
The Site may contain hyperlinks to other sites or resources that are provided solely for your convenience. Science & Technology Studies is not responsible for the availability of external sites or resources linked to the Site, and does not endorse and is not responsible or liable for any content, advertising, products or other materials on or available from such sites or resources. Transactions that occur between you and any third party are strictly between you and the third party and are not the responsibility of Science & Technology Studies. Due to the fact that Science & Technology Studies is not responsible for the availability or accuracy of these outside resources or their contents, you should review the terms and conditions and privacy policies of these linked sites, as their policies may differ from ours.
Last revised: 3 Aug 2020