Timber in Construction: Debunking Myths and Bridging the Gap between Construction and Forestry

Opinion Piece

Timber in Construction: Debunking Myths and Bridging the Gap between Construction and Forestry

At the Alliance for Sustainable Building Products (ASBP), we are leading a unique research initiative called IMPACTT (Innovative Mapping and Processes to Advance Construction Timber Transparency). The project aims to bridge the gap between forestry and construction and raise awareness about sustainable forestry practices and the environmental impacts of sourcing timber. By tracing the supply chains of selected timber buildings across Europe—from buildings to the forest of origin—we aim to provide a clearer picture of timber’s journey, its carbon impacts, and biodiversity conditions at the source. The findings will be presented as interactive maps, offering a visually engaging tool to communicate the often complex supply chains behind wood products.

IMPACTT is a collaborative effort led by ASBP, a non-profit organisation dedicated to promoting sustainable building practices. The project brings together partners including PEFC UK (Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification), Double Helix Tracking Technologies, Woodknowledge Wales, Agrodome, Stora Enso, Eurban, and TDUK (Timber Development UK). It is generously funded by Built by Nature, a network and grant-making fund focused on accelerating the shift towards timber and biobased construction.

The primary output of this project will be publicly available interactive supply chain maps hosted on Sourcemap, a renowned platform used by global brands like Ferrero, Mars, Timberland, and The North Face. This interactive approach will enable users to scan QR codes placed on selected buildings to access detailed supply chain maps, revealing where the timber originated and its associated environmental impacts. With the introduction of the European Union Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), which mandates the disclosure of the origin of specific commodities, the importance of traceability is more relevant than ever.

The IMPACTT project also aims to educate and bridge the knowledge gap between the construction and forestry sectors. Timber is the most commonly used biobased product in construction, with around 40% of timber worldwide going into the building industry. Yet, many in the construction sector know little about forestry. To address this, we conducted a survey with construction sector stakeholders. So far, the survey has received 60 responses, with architects making up 30% of the respondents.

The survey yielded interesting insights. We asked participants to self-assess their knowledge of sustainable forestry management, and 40% rated themselves as having an average understanding. Nearly equal proportions of respondents indicated good (7-8) and poor (3-4) knowledge levels.

We then asked them to describe their understanding of sustainable forestry, which we compared against the definition of sustainable forest management stated in 1993 at the pan-European Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe as:

“The stewardship and use of forest lands in a way and at a rate that maintains their productivity, biodiversity, regeneration capacity, vitality and their potential to fulfil now and in the future relevant ecological, economic and social functions at local, national and global levels and that does not cause damage to other ecosystems.”

Encouragingly, 38% of survey respondents demonstrated a very good understanding of SFM, covering multiple aspects such as ecological, economic, and social functions, maintaining biodiversity, and ensuring sustainable productivity and regeneration. About 20% had a partial understanding, missing one or more critical components, while 42% showed limited understanding, focusing on narrower aspects like certification or local economic impact without addressing the full scope of sustainable forestry principles. It is interesting to compare the results of the self-assessments with actual assessments. Often, when filling out questionnaires, respondents tend to select a neutral option, placing themselves around the middle of a scale, and that is what we observed. The reality has proven to be more polarised, with the majority of construction sector respondents who completed the survey showing either a very good or a poor understanding of sustainable forestry.

We also explored the factors considered when specifying timber for projects. Unsurprisingly, cost considerations were at the top of the list, but this was outranked by technical performance. Encouragingly, many respondents also prioritised certification schemes (ensuring timber comes from sustainably managed forests) and the timber’s origin. Timber availability, aesthetic qualities, and the carbon impact of sourcing were also significant considerations

However, the most revealing question was: “Are there any aspects of timber sourcing or forestry that you feel are commonly misunderstood or overlooked?”. This open-ended query provided rich data, showing a growing demand for more knowledge and highlighting the expanding agenda for timber buildings. The responses clustered around five key themes:

Forest Management Practices: Misunderstandings about forestry practices, and differences between sustainable and unsustainable logging were common. Respondents called for greater clarity on specific forestry practices, such as coppicing, agroforestry, and clear felling, and their sustainability impacts.
Homegrown vs Imported Timber: Using local timber is generally seen as beneficial. At the same time, some respondents pointed out that the carbon impact of transportation is relatively low compared to the ecological benefits of sourcing timber sustainably in general, and there are issues with the availability of timber for certain applications.
Technical Aspects of Timber as a Building Material: There is confusion around the strength, durability, and other properties of different timber species, both local and imported. Misunderstandings also exist around the circular impact of timber extraction and quality comparisons between regions like the UK and Scandinavia.
Carbon Sequestration and Biodiversity Impacts: Respondents noted a need for more education on the lifecycle carbon impacts of timber, including its use in buildings as carbon storage and its biodiversity impacts.
Knowledge of Chain of Custody Certification Schemes: Several respondents highlighted a lack of understanding of certification schemes like PEFC or FSC, calling for deeper knowledge beyond accepting certifications at face value.

With these insights, we are now working to address these issues, providing reliable sources and facts to help the construction sector better understand timber sourcing and forestry. Built by Nature, in collaboration with other organisations, has produced an excellent report covering some of these aspects: Discussing Timber Myths. Our project will delve into specific aspects of timber sourcing and forestry from a UK perspective.

The IMPACTT project will conclude in February, and we will publish a report addressing these myths and present our supply chain maps. As we move closer to the project’s completion, we look forward to sharing our findings and contributing to more sustainable and transparent timber supply chains. To keep updated on the project, visit our website, subscribe to our newsletters, or follow our page on LinkedIn. For more information, please contact Simon Corbey, CEO of ASBP, at simon@asbp.org.uk.