Response to Comments of Ben Gunneberg
AbstractAn unreferenced statement on page 608 is challenged as being incorrect. FSC and PEFC are competitors and issues on the differences between the programs are often arguable. We do agree that a small portion of the statement could have been more clearly stated, but the intent of the statement was essentially correct. The original article contained 80 references and not every sentence could be referenced. We include 18 additional references below to strengthen and clarify our statement. View Full-Text
Scifeed alert for new publicationsNever miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
- Get alerts for new papers matching your research
- Find out the new papers from selected authors
- Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
- Define your Scifeed now
Straka, T.J.; Layton, P.A. Response to Comments of Ben Gunneberg. Sustainability 2010, 2, 2621-2625.
Straka TJ, Layton PA. Response to Comments of Ben Gunneberg. Sustainability. 2010; 2(8):2621-2625.Chicago/Turabian Style
Straka, Thomas J.; Layton, Patricia A. 2010. "Response to Comments of Ben Gunneberg." Sustainability 2, no. 8: 2621-2625.