EU Expected to Postpone Implementation of Anti-Deforestation Legislation for One Year

October 3, 2024 TruthUSA

Companies will need to utilize satellite monitoring to ensure their products are not made on deforested or degraded land as mandated by the law.

The European Commission has suggested a one-year delay in enforcing a law that prohibits importing commodities associated with deforestation due to industry pressure.

Scheduled to come into effect in less than 90 days on Dec. 30, the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) will demand that companies bringing in items like soy, beef, cocoa, coffee, palm oil, timber, and rubber provide evidence that their supply chains did not contribute to deforestation or risk hefty penalties.

The EU views the law as a vital part of its climate action agenda and efforts to combat biodiversity loss. Nevertheless, critics in the industry argue that the EUDR will disrupt supply chains, while some ecologists caution that it might unintentionally harm biodiversity.

The European Commission announced on Wednesday that it had proposed an additional 12 months for phasing in the law in response to calls from global partners. However, this proposal requires approval from both the European Parliament and member states.

Bureaucracy

Under the law, companies will need to electronically provide due diligence statements to the deforestation registry established by the European Commission for verification.

Companies argue that this will entail digitally mapping their supply chains using satellite technology down to the specific plots where their raw materials are sourced, even on small and remote farms.

Herbert Dorfmann and Peter Liese, members of the European Parliament and spokesmen for the EPP Group on the Agriculture and Environment committees, raised concerns earlier this month.

“Farmers, retailers, small and large businesses, and Member State governments are deeply concerned about the jungle of implementing rules that will apply to several production sectors,” they said in a statement.

“This bureaucratic monster threatens the supply of animal feed and the trade of many consumer goods. The Commission must take enough time to fix the many problems with the legislation.”

‘Paralyzing Uncertainties’

In March, 20 of the EU’s 27 member states urged Brussels to scale back or possibly suspend the law, arguing that it could harm the bloc’s own farmers, who would be banned from exporting products grown on deforested land.

Brazil, Australia, and the United States have asked the EU to hold off.

Furthermore, last week, 29 European associations across a range of industries including farming, media, meat traders, packaging, and timber, said that they face “paralyzing uncertainties.”

Farming body Copa-Cogeca and meat industry organization the European Livestock and Meat Trading Union said on Sept. 26 that they recognized “the importance of global forests to combat climate change, preserve biodiversity and secure sustainable raw materials and supply chains.”

However, they said the December 2024 date was “simply unfeasible and would result in many small businesses being wiped out of the market and job losses in rural areas.”

“Already now, companies are facing paralyzing uncertainties when negotiating contracts for next year. In consequence, serious market disruptions can be expected, which would severely harm European primary producers and downstream industries,” they said.

Ancient Ecosystems

While the legislation aims to prevent biodiversity loss, some ecologists argue that preventative measures could negatively affect ancient ecosystems.

Environmentalist and conservationist Pablo Manzano told The Epoch Times: “While the intention of the law is good, it has a lot of nuances that can be negative, especially if areas that are considered natural forests are actually not.”

“There’s a concern that this and other legislation may do more harm to biodiversity than they intend to solve. Simplistic policies fail to differentiate between ecosystem types.”

Manzano pointed out that in southern Brazil’s Rio Grande do Sul state, the government’s “problematic” decision to protect areas without grazing has led to a drop in biodiversity.

“All the ecological functionality is lost when shrubs and trees invade areas where they shouldn’t be, places they haven’t existed for at least 3 million years, if not longer,” he said.

Reflecting on the potential dangers of the law, he said, “I see that with the direction they’re taking with such a simplistic interpretation, this can really happen, and it’s a danger.”

He said that the systems and farmers most affected by the legislation possess deep knowledge of their ecosystems and animal management.

“If you damage those systems, you may later not be able to recover,” he said.

The Epoch Times contacted the EU Commission for comment but didn’t receive a reply by publication time.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Source link