Forests are our most important allies in the fight against the climate catastrophe. They are the only way we have to bind CO2 that has already been emitted and they help us to cope with the ever worsening consequences of global warming by providing shade, loosening soils for water absorption and forming natural barriers against mudslides as a result of flooding. To prevent the climate catastrophe, we need to give forests more space. Currently, however, we are doing the exact opposite: Forests around the world are threatened by deforestation and the consequences of the climate crisis, the best-known example being the rainforests in Brazil, where I have already been able to see for myself the terrible consequences of deforestation for biodiversity, but above all for the population in the affected areas. But European forests are not in a good condition either. Whether it is the deforestation of Romanian primary forests for fast furniture à la IKEA, huge clear-cutting in the Basque Country, draining of wetland forests in Croatia or harmful harvesting methods in the Baltic states, the EU forestry sector is no forerunner. And even where forests in Austria are not declining, the same cannot be said of the biodiversity in those forests.
Intransparency in supply chains
Europe is not only responsible for the deforestation of its own forests, but is also a major contributor to global deforestation. According to the WWF, 16 percent of global deforestation is caused by imports into the EU. Deforestation does not only occur for the production of the raw material wood, but also for the creation of cattle pastures, the cultivation of soy as animal feed, as well as palm oil, wood, cocoa and coffee. These products are then exported to the EU, where it is impossible for European consumers to understand whether the products they buy contribute to global deforestation and the associated problems. This is where the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) comes into play, which is intended to ensure that products from deforested areas no longer end up on the European market. It was adopted by the European Parliament and the member states in 2023 – with the votes of the ÖVP. It stipulates that products made from the raw materials wood, palm oil, soy, coffee, cocoa and rubber must be produced without deforestation or forest degradation. In accordance with the principle of non-discrimination, this applies to imports into the EU as well as exports and the internal market. Similar to the EU Nature Restoration Law, the ÖVP, the farmers’ association and the timber industry are also spreading many false claims about the EU deforestation regulation. But what is it really about?
Law to combat deforestation
The law refers to all deforestation activities in connection with the production of one of the above-mentioned raw materials that took place after December 31, 2020. Anything before this date is not taken into account. Small forest owners who only produce for their own needs, e.g. firewood, are completely excluded. Products from low-risk countries like Austria are subject to a simplified due diligence obligation, in which the obligation to assess risks and take risk mitigation measures does not apply. SMEs and micro-enterprises are also exempt from the obligation to report publicly.
The due diligence declaration can also be outsourced to an authorized representative, so natural persons and micro-enterprises, among others, can delegate to the next market participant who is not a natural person.
What do forest owners and companies need to do?
Anyone who markets products must provide information about them. This includes a description of the product (e.g. tree species in the case of wood), quantity, country (part) of production, parcel number, time and area of production, name, address, email of suppliers & those who are supplied, appropriately conclusive, verifiable information that products are deforestation-free and have been produced in accordance with national law. Contrary to misinformation-claims, not every single tree must be declared, only the quantity and species harvested from a plot of land. The information can also be combined if different species are harvested from one plot of land. Once the key data such as the plot of land has been entered, only the quantity harvested and the tree species need to be specified each year. The data situation in Austria is already very good, which should provide opportunities to make implementation as simple and unbureaucratic as possible for farmers. The Ministry of Agriculture now has to use existing data, work with the Commission to provide interfaces and avoid parallel systems and obligations in order to implement this important law as efficiently as possible.
So what is the problem?
Arguments such as an alleged flood of bureaucracy are therefore easily refuted. So what is really the problem with a regulation against destructive overexploitation and for traceable supply chains and sustainable forestry? Large Austrian timber industry companies such as HS Timber have already been condemned in the past for their preferential purchase of wood from illegal deforestation in Romania and have not only actively promoted deforestation with their business activities in Russia and Belarus, but have also actively supported dictators in obtaining money despite EU economic sanctions. This type of activity would no longer be possible with the EU Deforestation Regulation. The EU Deforestation Regulation makes harmful practices visible. For the small-scale, sustainable Austrian forestry sector, the labeling of sustainable origin is a clear competitive advantage. The fact that the ÖVP sees this differently says more about them and their interests than about the EU law.
Support from the Industry
Despite the negative campaigns launched by EPP & co more than 1.1 million citizens have signed multiple petitions backing the EUDR and pushing back against the delay. The EUDR continues to be a key priority for EU citizens, who want swift implementation. Last week, a poll conducted across seven EU countries revealed overwhelming public support for the EUDR: 84% of all respondents want to see the law implemented.
But not only citizens and NGOs are outspoken in their support for the EUDR. Last week, the Financial Times and the Wall Street Journal echoed businesses’ concerns regarding current discussions around EUDR postponement: Companies complained about the “instability created” across supply chains, stating that “predictability” and “legal certainty” are paramount. They urge the European Parliament to “maintain the EUDR’s core framework”, to avoid “jeopardising significant [compliance] investments”. 1
ÖVP on the wrong track
Despite this massive resistance and against the will of European citizens and large sections of industry, the European People’s Party has now decided to follow Christian Lindner’s path and attempt to postpone the entry into force of the deforestation regulation at the last minute. The Commission gave in to the pressure and proposed a postponement of one year. Now the European People’s Party has also tabled amendments to extend the postponement to two years. But more than that he European People’s Party has tabled amendments for this week’s plenary vote that would exempt large parts of the industry from the regulation and thus make it de facto useless. It is clear to me that we have no time to blindly follow the lobbyists of the timber industry while the climate crisis is threatening our food security with storms and droughts and washing away our villages. The weakening now being demanded is a de facto undermining in favor of the Austrian and European timber industry, which wants to shirk its responsibility. Setting global standards also means that we have to abide by our own rules.
Further info
Greens/EFA actionpage
Greens/EFA press release
- More info: See public statements from Nestlé, Ferrero, Danone, Michelin, Carrefour, coffee and soy trader ETG, leading global producer of hardwood veneer and timber Danzer, French bovine farmers association INTERBEV, wood certification initiative FSC, members of the Global Platform for Sustainable Natural Rubber, and Albert Heijn. ↩︎