International Countries, businesses and trade officials urge EU to rethink deforestation regulation

[LeonardoBjj]

BY VICTORIA MILKO
Updated 10:16 AM BRT, October 2, 2024

JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) — A growing number of governments, international trade organizations and businesses are urging the European Union to reconsider a deforestation regulation set to take effect in December.

Critics of the regulation say it will discriminate against countries with forest resources and hurt their exports. Supporters of the EU Deforestation Regulation, EUDR for short, say it will help combat forest degradation on a global scale.
Several commodity associations have said they support the objectives of the regulation but that gaps in its implementation could harm their businesses.

Environmental organizations have voiced support, saying the EUDR will help slow global deforestation, which is the second-biggest source of carbon emissions after fossil fuels.

Here’s a look at the EU Deforestation Regulation:

What is the EUDR and what products is it expected to impact?​

Currently scheduled to go into effect on Dec. 30, the EU Deforestation Regulation will outlaw the sale of forest-derived products within the 27-nation bloc if companies can’t prove their goods are not linked to deforestation. Its scope is wide, including cocoa, coffee, soy, cattle, palm oil, rubber, wood and products derived from these commodities.

To sell those products in Europe, big companies will have to prove they come from land where forests haven’t been cut since Jan. 1, 2021, regardless of whether the deforestation was legal in the countries of origin. Small businesses further down the supply chain are subject to the same obligations and retain legal responsibility if regulations are violated. But they are not liable for due diligence for parts of their products that were already subject to review.

Failure to comply can result in financial penalties and restricted access to the EU market.

The regulation also introduces a benchmarking system that ranks countries or regions based on the risk of non-compliance with the EUDR in three categories: low, standard, or high.

“We have been working very closely with a whole range of stakeholders in order to help them prepare for the entry into effect of the regulation,” European Commission spokesperson Adalbert Jahnz said at a recent press briefing in Brussels.

“We keep the situation under constant review. We are working hard to ensure that all the conditions are met for a smooth implementation of the law,” he said.

On Wednesday the EU offered to delay by a year the introduction of new rules that would outlaw the sale of products that come from forests following an outcry from several governments claiming that it will damage trade and hurt small farmers.

The EU’s executive branch, the European Commission, said that “it would make the law applicable on 30 December 2025 for large companies and 30 June 2026 for micro- and small enterprises,” if the 27 member countries and the bloc’s parliament agree.

Why are there calls for delays in implementing the EUDR?​

Officials from leading exporters of affected commodities — including Brazil, Indonesia and the Ivory Coast — object to the regulation, saying it could act as a trade barrier, negatively affect small farmers and disrupt supply chains.

“This regulation disregards local circumstances and capabilities, national legislations, certification mechanisms, their efforts to fight deforestation, and multilateral commitments of producer countries, including the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities,” the Indonesian embassy in Brussels, where the EU is headquartered, said in a statement. Indonesia is the world’s largest exporter of palm oil and exports many other forest-derived commodities.

Politicians within the EU have also raised concerns or asked for postponements. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz asked that the regulation be suspended. Austria and some agricultural ministries in EU member states have also sought to weaken the regulation.

The Commission conceded that “the state of preparations amongst stakeholders in Europe is also uneven. While many expect to be ready in time, thanks to intensive preparations, others have expressed concerns.”

The head of the World Trade Organization reportedly has asked Brussels to reconsider the ban on imports from deforested areas, saying the EU has not yet issued clear compliance guidelines.

The World Trade Organization declined a request for comment from The Associated Press.

Lobbying groups representing businesses that will be impacted — such as animal feed and tire producers — have also voiced concerns about the regulation’s strict traceability requirements and a flawed information entry and database system where companies need to submit their due diligence statements.

How do conservationists hope the EUDR will help protect forests?​

Europe ranked second in the amount of deforestation caused by its imports in 2017, according to a 2021 World Wildlife Fund report. Environmental organizations have said the EUDR will help reduce that.

In Brazil — where wildfires have rage d during a record drought — 25 environmental groups voiced their support for the regulations in a letter sent to the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, saying companies and government offices were preparing to implement the new requirements.

“This groundbreaking regulation is the most ambitious legislative attempt to tackle these issues worldwide,” the Brazilian organizations wrote in their letter. “Every second counts to protect human lives today, as well as humankind’s future, avoid climate change, and stop biodiversity losses.”

The regulation could also help set a precedent for other countries considering legislation that would have a similar effect, said Julian Oram, a policy leader for international environmental organization Mighty Earth.

“It’s a catalyst for governments around the world to say enough is enough: That we can’t continue to import or produce goods linked to deforestation, that there has to be a cutoff point— and that is now.”

Hear our Mother crying in silent tears
For she can't speak, she only cries She cries to me
Draw the final curtain, for senseless thoughts
And senseless hands have shaped the future

Is it not what you thought would come?
Or maybe people no longer care for Mother Earth
Earth Mother is screaming, we can't live without her
No time left for dreaming here, she knows Have we forgot our future?

Earth Mother, life giver, we can't live without her
So foolish, men who say they don't care
They'll be gone anyway
Feel our
Mother nurture, for we are the children

Suckling at her breasts she gives us life, she give us all we need
What do we give in return for life we take from her?
Oh, forgive us Mother, forgive us
For we know what we do We've blistered and burned you
Our kind may soon be through, we've raped you Earth Mother is screaming,

We can't live without her
No time left for dreaming here, she knows
Have we forgot our future?
Earth Mother, life giver, we can't live without her
So foolish, men who say they don't care
They'll be gone anyway Earth Mother is screaming,



https://apnews.com/article/eu-deforestation-eudr-indonesia-brazil-3290bc806068914ba88a3c676235b8f5

 

[SandisLL]

There IMHO in Europe is big double edged sword with trees protection in europe.
In some areas they IMHO are dumb and in some cases allow this.

In other cases their bireucrats are nightmare in useless efforts.
For example some trees makes some kind of potential threat for infrastructure objects, mortgage etc. In case if will fall apart.

In one case I had such experience: 2 trees, road and communication line repair...plus electricity supply line.
Land owners were 2 private and 1 municipality.... plus ofc bireucrats from env protection institution.
May month: get permit to deal with 1 tree.
November: after 2 nd tree had to fall on electricity supply line then permit to remowe remainings of tree had been issued in 1 hour....earlier discussions were 18 months in row...Jesus.

 

[SandisLL]

For me ofc better likes wildlife and forest, while life reality is that we don't want to experience falling trees on our cars in car parking place or on roofs...

 

[LeonardoBjj]

Former EU environment chief hits out at plans to delay anti-deforestation law​

Credibility ‘damaged’ by proposed 12-month delay, which followed lobbying from governments and firms around the world

Jennifer Rankin in Brussels

A former top environment official has said the EU’s credibility on its climate commitments has been damaged by plans for a one-year delay to a law to combat deforestation that followed intense lobbying from companies and governments around the world.

Virginijus Sinkevičius, a Lithuanian MEP who was the environment commissioner until mid-July, said postponing the deforestation regulation would be “a step backward in the fight against climate change”.


In a sharp rebuke to the European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, Sinkevičius, who drafted the legislation that was agreed in 2023, said the 12-month delay would put 80,000 acres (32,375 hectares) of forest at risk each day, fuel 15% of global carbon emissions, break trust with the EU’s global partners and damage its credibility on its climate commitments.

On Wednesday, the European Commission proposed a 12-month delay to the law, which has been hailed by its advocates as the most ambitious in the world to combat deforestation. The law will ban the sale in the EU of commodities linked to deforestation such as cocoa, coffee, soya, palm oil and rubber, as well as products including chocolate, leather and furniture. Companies are required to use satellite monitoring and other checks to ensure their products have not been produced on land deforested or degraded after 31 December 2020.

The delay must be approved by the EU ministers and the European parliament to take effect.

If approved, the law would come into force on 30 December 2025 for large companies and 30 June 2026 for micro and small enterprises.

The call for a delay followed intense lobbying from governments and companies around the world, which argued that the law unfairly penalised exports to Europe and would harm small farmers and businesses.

In a statement released on Wednesday, the commission said a 12-month delay “to phase in the system” was a balanced solution that would support operators around the world in “securing a smooth implementation from the start”.

Countries including Brazil and Australia had pushed for a delay, arguing that EU officials were using the wrong data to measure forests, while Indonesia and Ivory Coast have said it could penalise small farmers and harm their exports.

“Global partners have repeatedly expressed concerns about their state of preparedness,” most recently during the United Nations general assembly in New York last week, the commission said.

“The extension proposal in no way puts into question the objectives or the substance of the law,” it added.

The law was adopted by a large majority of MEPs and member states in April 2023, but since then there has been a growing backlash about the costs of environmental legislation that has led the commission, for example, to scrap plans for pesticides regulation.

Environmental campaigners said Von der Leyen, who is soon to begin a second five-year term as commission president, was undermining one of the key achievements of her term, the European green deal.

Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove, a senior forest policy officer at WWF, said: “President Von der Leyen is effectively giving her green light for deforestation to continue for another 12 months at a time when urgent action is needed to stop it. By undermining one of the key achievements of the European green deal, this decision casts serious doubt on the commission president’s commitment to delivering on the EU’s environmental promises.”

Nicole Polsterer at the campaign group Fern said: “Ursula von der Leyen has bowed to constant pressure from companies and countries who knew the regulation was coming for years but haven’t prepared properly for it. This is unacceptable, especially when so many other companies have invested time and money to be ready.”


Von der Leyen also faced lobbying to postpone the law from her own centre-right European People’s party , which argued that the legislation created a “substantial” administrative burden for businesses and public authorities.

Peter Liese, a German MEP who speaks for the EPP on environmental policy, said he welcomed the proposed delay and was sure the European parliament would approve it. “The regulation entering into force on 30 December 2024 would have plunged us into irresponsible chaos. Many of the conditions for application are not clear and many third countries are rightly complaining,” he said.

Deforestation, Liese added, “is a disaster for the global climate as for other things, but we have to do it the right way and get those affected by the law more involved”.

The VDMA, which represents Europe’s mechanical engineering industry, described the law as “a prime example of well-intentioned but badly done regulation” that was likely to make all affected products scarcer and more expensive.

“Obtaining the required geolocation data may be easy for cattle and products made from them. For other rubber products covered by the regulation, the reality is much more complex. The consequences here would be major supply difficulties,” it said.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...f-criticises-plans-to-delay-deforestation-law