Others are unconvinced that sufficient demand for certified products exists to offset the costs of meeting certification criteria. Some cite a United Nations study that claims the world timber trade contributes only incidentally to deforestation, and question whether market incentives for improved forestry can be effective. The AFPA, an alliance of 450 U.S. forest products companies and trade groups, is countering the certification movement with its own Sustainable Forestry Initiative. Whether consumers will be satisfied with industry as its own watchdog, or prefer the FSC's independent evaluations of forestry practices, remains to be seen. Many concerns center on specific practices that have become flash points in the sustainable forestry debate.
Clear cuts are a tool within a suite of forestry tools and it's a question of how they're applied.
You get down to very fine details as to the size and shape of clearcuts and the devil is in those details. Another controversial area is how to assess forest plantations, in which large even-aged stands of a single, often exotic, species are cultivated in place of natural forest. An area recently clearcut to make room for a plantation is clearly not certifiable. Recently-ratified FSC guidelines allow for the certification of plantations but stress that they should be managed to reduce pressure on, and promote the restoration of, nearby natural forests. The argument is that we need to increase the amount of wood we get from plantations in order to prevent further erosion into old growth and natural forest areas.