Certification programs may include market access benefits for those business that have certified voluntarily, but there are also other consequences, such as the ban on the use of certain chemical pesticides imposed by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) that can negatively affect integrated pest management. The Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) was created in response to FSC standards and includes national certification schemes such as the Responsible Wood (RW), previously known as the Australian Forestry Standard (AFS). The objective of this study was to evaluate the impacts of FSC and RW/PEFC certification on practices of integrated pest management from the perspective of Australian forest growers. Questionnaires were emailed to all organizations in Australia with forest plantations certified by FSC and/or RW/PEFC. The questionnaire addressed the importance of forest pest groups, pest control techniques, chemical pesticides (insecticides and herbicides) in derogation; the advantages and disadvantages of integrated pest management related to the certification; and satisfaction with certification in relation to pest management. The two insecticides in derogation were considered unnecessary by most of Australian growers. FSC promoted more changes in integrated pest management than RW. Half the FSC-certified companies stated that they had greater costs associated with integrated pest management to adequately meet certification. RW-certified growers were more satisfied than FSC-certified ones, but both groups stated that they would maintain certification in a scenario without further insecticide derogation. The main changes in pest management for FSC-certified companies were with preventive techniques that reduce the use and dependence on insecticides. The environmental and social side of FSC prevailed in these changes. Raising certification rigor can increase costs, making certification impracticable, forcing companies to adopt less restrictive schemes or simply not certify.

认证计划可以包括那些自愿认证，这些业务的市场准入的好处，但也有其他后果，比如在使用由可产生负面影响综合虫害管理森林管理委员会（FSC）施加一定的化学农药的禁令。森林认证认可计划 (PEFC) 是为响应 FSC 标准而创建的，其中包括国家认证计划，例如负责任的木材 (RW)，以前称为澳大利亚林业标准 (AFS)。这项研究的目的是评估FSC和RW / PEFC认证的来自澳大利亚林农角度综合虫害管理实践的影响。问卷调查通过电子邮件发送给所有组织在澳大利亚与FSC和/或RW / PEFC认证的人工林。该问卷涉及林业有害生物群体，病虫害防治技术，减损化学农药（杀虫剂和除草剂）的重要性; 优势和相关认证病虫害综合治理的缺点; 以及与认证有关的有害生物管理的满意度。减损两种杀虫剂被大多数澳大利亚种植者认为是不必要的。FSC促进了综合虫害管理比RW更多的变化。一半的FSC认证的企业表示，他们曾与害虫综合管理相关的充分满足认证更大的成本。RW认证的种植户比FSC认证的人都比较满意，但是这两个群体表示，他们将保持在一个场景中的认证没有进一步杀虫剂减损。在害虫管理FSC认证的企业，主要的变化是与减少杀虫剂的使用和依赖的预防技术。FSC的环境和社会方面的这些变化占了上风。提高认证的严谨性会增加成本，使认证不可行，迫使公司采取限制较少的方案或根本就没有保证。