DEFORESTATION FREE POLICY, EMBODIED DEFORESTATION  AND DEFORESTATION FOOTPRINTS 2023

Abstract

The European Union (EU), the United States (USA), and the United Kingdom (UK) have formulated a “deforestation-free” policy as part of their trade policies (domestic and international) for products and commodities related to deforestation (embodied deforestation). It is hoped that reducing or even eliminating the consumption of these commodities and products can stop or at least reduce the global deforestation. The background argument behind the policy is considered weak, considering that all commodities and products produced by non-forest land are the results of deforestation from the pre-1700s to the present. So, are there any commodities or products that are free from deforestation?

Introduction

Three countries that have intensively carried out deforestation in the past are now making “deforestation-free” policies for commodities and products imported from other countries. The three countries/regions in question are the European Union (EU), the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States of America (USA).

The anti-deforestation policy is intended to stop global deforestation. By reducing or even eliminating the consumption of commodities and products related to deforestation (embodied deforestation) both from within the country and from outside the countries (imports), it is expected that it can stop or at least reduce the global deforestation.

In addition to the definition of forest and deforestation, the “deforestation-free” policy as an international trade policy have concern various important issues. One of them is the issue of the deforestation footprint, namely the time limit when deforestation starts is calculated as the basis for a “deforestation-free” policy. This is important considering that global deforestation has been going on since the beginning of civilization, which is the same age as human civilization on planet earth.

Even the countries that implemented “deforestation-free” policies such as the EU, UK, and USA, have their deforestation footprints that can be traced back historically. The historical record concludes that non-forested land in these countries is also the result of past deforestation. So, any commodity or product produced on existing land is also related to deforestation (embodied deforestation).

This paper will discuss embodied deforestation and the “deforestation-free” policy. Then will discuss related global deforestation footprints, including what occurred in the EU, UK, and USA, where these footprints have the potential to become polemic when the “deforestation-free” policy is implemented.

DEFORESTATION AND THE “DEFORESTATION-FREE” POLICY

Since 2011, the European Union has conducted studies on the impact of EU consumption on global deforestation (European Commission, 2013). A consortium (Vito, IIASA, Cicero, KU Leuven, IUCN-Netherlands) developed the concept of “embodied deforestation”, which “…refers to deforestation associated with the production of a good or commodity. This good or commodity may be consumed in the country of origin or traded elsewhere. It allows us to link deforestation in producer countries/regions with the associated consumption of goods in consumer countries/regions….”

The study reveals that crop and livestock production processes are linked to global deforestation because these products are consumed domestically and produced wholly or partly domestically, and some are traded and consumed internationally. About 33 percent of crop production and 8 percent of livestock products linked to global deforestation are consumed outside of the producing countries. Around 36 percent of the volume of commodities/products related to embodied deforestation traded internationally is imported and consumed by the EU community.

Embodied deforestation is the basis of the “deforestation-free” policy. The EU community is responsible for global deforestation through their consumption of imported commodities and products whose production is linked to deforestation. Therefore, the EU community must stop consuming these commodities and products by implementing the “deforestation-free” policy to suppress and even stop global deforestation. Three countries or regions, namely the European Union (EU), the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States of America (USA), have issued and implemented “deforestation-free” policies.

The EU issued the Regulation on Deforestation-Free Commodities and Products in September 2022, and it will implement in 2023. Previously, the USA had enacted the Fostering Overseas Rule of Law and Environmentally Sound Trade Act (FOREST Act 2021) in 2021. The UK has also implemented the UK Environment Act 2021, which has been in effect since 2021. Although there are some differences between the three policies, they all have the same principle are being “deforestation-free” for trade in domestic and/or international products/commodities.

Some of the principles of the anti-deforestation policies of the EU, UK, and USA (UK Parliament, 2021; Weiss & Shin, 2021; Monard & Manistis, 2021; McCarty, 2022; Weiss et al., 2022; Chain Reaction Research, 2022) include: (1) the “deforestation-free” policy applies to illegal deforestation (USA, UK), while the policies implemented in the EU cover legal, illegal, and forest degradation; (2) the commodities and products targeted by the policy are forest-risk commodities, both domestic and imported (for the EU and UK), while for the USA it only applies to imported commodities and products; and (3) exporting countries for forest risk commodities and products must undergo due diligence to be categorized into three groups based on the “deforestation-free” criteria, namely low-risk, standard-risk, and high-risk.

Although several commodities target the “deforestation-free” policy in the three countries/regions, it seems that the policy has targeted palm oil as the main target. This can be traced to the policy’s background. For example, in the USA, it is reflected in the statement of Senator Schatz (one of the proponents of the policy) that “… half of the products in American grocery stores contain palm oil and most of that comes from illegally deforested land around the world…”.

Likewise, since the beginning of the policy drafting phase in the EU, palm oil has been the main driven deforestation (embodied deforestation) in that region (European Commission, 2013). So, it is not surprising that the policy was actually designed to suppress the development of the global palm oil industry.

THE DEFORESTATION FOOTPRINTS

The concept of embodied deforestation developed by the EU (and the USA) as the basis for the “deforestation-free” policy has not only a location dimension but also a time dimension. Global deforestation is not only happening today in various countries of the world but has also occurred since the beginning of human civilization on planet earth. Deforestation has been a normal phenomenon in the development stage since the beginning of civilization (Walker, 1993; Egli, 2001; Bhattarai et al., 2001; Kaplan et al., 2017; Keenan et al., 2015; PASPI Monitor, 2021).

Then, tropical countries have only recently begun to develop their economies, so tropical forest deforestation has intensified since the 1900s. The peak of tropical deforestation occurred in 1950–1979 (FAO, 2012; Roser, 2012).

During 1850-1990, the logging volume of boreal and temperate forests increased from 1 million hectares per year to 3.5 million hectares per year. The increase in logging volume also occurs in temperate forests, from 3 million hectares per year to 6 million hectares per year. Meanwhile, the volume of logging from tropical forests in 1850 was still very small, less than 0.5 million hectares per year increased to 2 million hectares per year in 1950 and 8 million hectares per year in 1980. One billion million hectares of the world’s forests have been logged, or about 77 percent higher than the conversion of forests to agricultural land.

Empirical facts (Figure 4) show that virgin forest (primary forest) in Europe and the USA is less than in Indonesia. The loss of virgin forests in mainland Europe and North America shows that these countries carried out total deforestation in the early days of their development in the past. This total deforestation causes the loss of their biodiversity. Where is the typical biodiversity of mainland Europe and North America today? This is different from Indonesia, where the virgin forest is still large enough so that the “home” of tropical biodiversity is still relatively preserved.

The global deforestation footprint makes it clear that agricultural lands in Europe, North America, and other subtropical regions result from deforestation that has been carried out since time immemorial. If we trace, all global commodity lands can be ascertained to be related to deforestation. Likewise, modern cities in these countries are also the result of deforestation.

Until now, deforestation continues to occur in various parts of the world. Based on a study by the European Commission (2013), the global deforestation area during the period 1990–2008 reached 239 million hectares. Deforestation occurred in the Americas (40 percent), Africa (31.6 percent), and Asia (26.2 percent) during that period. The rest are in Europe (1.5 percent) and Oceania (2.5 percent). An interesting fact from the data is that mainland Europe and North America were the world’s centers of deforestation in the pre-agricultural period until 1980. Although they are no longer the global drivers of deforestation in the 1990-2008 period, deforestation in these two regions has continued.

In 1990–2008, the largest area of global deforestation was the Americas, especially South and Central America and the African Region, or 71 percent of the global deforestation. If the Asian region’s share of deforestation is included in the calculation, these regions accounted for approximately 97 percent of global deforestation from 1990 to 2008.

Thus, it is pretty clear that today’s non-forest lands, both in the EU, UK, and USA, as well as in other world countries, are primarly the result of deforestation from the past. As a result, any commodities and products derived from non-forest lands in the world, whether consumed domestically or traded internationally, are associated with deforestation.

So, are there commodities and products produced and traded internationally that are not related to deforestation so that they can be categorized as “deforestation-free” commodities and products?

The “deforestation-free” policy, which only considers palm oil, soybean oil, cattle, cocoa, coffee (EU only), rubber, wood products, and pulp, and corn as forest-risk commodities, does not have a solid argument. Historically, all commodities and products produced from non-forest land are related to deforestation.

Conslusion

The concept of embodied deforestation is a concept that links the consumption of a commodity and product associated with deforestation. Deforestation can occur in countries where the consumption of commodities/products occurs, but it can also happen in other countries through global trading. The “deforestation-free” policy is based on embodied deforestation concept, which “forces” consumers not to consume forest-risk commodities.

Historically, deforestation occurred in almost all non-forest land in the world is the result of past deforestation. So that all commodities and products produced from non-forest land in each country are linked to deforestation. There are almost no commodities and/or products that are not related to deforestation. Therefore, the “deforestation-free” policy, which only applies to some commodities, has a feeble argument.

References

• Barredo J, Brailesco C, Teller A, Sabatini FM, Mauri A, Janouskova K. 2021. Mapping and Assessment of Primary and Old-Growth Forests in Europe. European Commision: JRC Science for Policy Report.
• Belmaker G. 2018. More than half of Europe’s forests lost over 6,000 years. [internet].
• Bhattarai M, Haming M. 2001. Institution and The Environmental Kuznet Curve for Deforestation: A Cross Country Analysis for Latin America, Africa and Asia. World Development. 29(6): 995-1010.
• Chain Reaction Research. 2022. EU Deforestation Regulation: Implications for Palm Oil Industry and Its Financers [internet].
• Egli H. 2001. Area Cross Country Study of the Environmental Kuznet Curve Misleading? New evidence from time series data to Germany. Greifswald (DE): Universiteit Greifswald.
• European Commission. 2013. The Impact of EU Consumption on Deforestation: Comprehensive: Analysis of the Impact of EU Consumption on Deforestation. Final Report
• [FAO] Food Agricultural Organization. 2007. Manual on Deforestation, Degradation, and Fragmentation Using Remote Sensing And GIS. Forestry Department. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome. Italy.
• [FAO] Food Agricultural Organization. 2012. State of the World Forest. Rome.
• [FAO] Food Agricultural Organization. 2018. Terms and Definition: Forest Resources Assessment 2020. Food and Agriculture Organization, United of Nations. Rome
• Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Forest Ecology and Management. 352:9-20
• Houghton RA. 1999. Land Use Change and Terrestrial Carbon: The Temporal Record in Forest Ecosystem, Forest Management and the Global Carbon Cycles (ed. MJ Apps & D.T. Price).
• Houghton RA. 1999. Land Use Change and Terrestrial Carbon: The Temporal Record in Forest Ecosystem, Forest Management and the Global Carbon Cycles (ed. MJ Apps & D.T. Price).
• Kaplan JO. 2017. Constraining the Deforestation History of Europe: Evaluation of Historical Land Use Scenarios with Pollen-Based Land Cover Reconstructions. Land. 1-20
• Kaplan, J. K. M. Krumhardt. N. Zimmermann. 2009. The prehistoric and preindustrial deforestation of Europe. Quaternary Science Reviews 28 (2009) 3016–3034.
• Keenan RJ. 2015. Dynamics of Global Forest Area: Results from the FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Forest Ecology and Management. 352:9-20
• Koh LP, Wilcove DS. 2008. Is Oil Palm Agriculture Really Destroying Tropical Biodiversity. Conservation Letters. 1(2).
• Matthew E. 1983. Global Vegetation and Land Use: New High-Resolution Data Based for Climate Study. Journal of climate change and applied Meteorology. 22:474-487.
• McCarty J. 2022. What Is the FOREST Act? Everything to Know About the US Bill to Fight Deforestation. [internet].
• Monard E, B Manistis. 2021.The European Commission’s Proposed Ban on Products Driving Deforestation and Forest Degradation. [internet].
• NoMorePlanet.com. (2020). Origins & History of Deforestation. [internet].
• Panayotou T. 2003. Economic Growth and the Environment. Boston (USA): Harvard University and Cyprus International Institute of Management.
• [PASPI] Palm Oil Agribusiness Strategic Policy Institute. 2017. Myth and Fact: Indonesia Palm Oil Industry in Socio, Economic and Environment Issues. Bogor
• PASPI Monitor. 2021. Deforestation a Normal Phenomenon in the Development Process?. Palm Oil Journal: Analysis Isu Strategis. 11(3): 339-344.
• Roda JM. 2019. The Geopolitics of Palm Oil and Deforestation. [internet].
• Rostow WW. 1960. The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto. Cambridgeshie (UK): Cambridge University.
• Sabatini FM, Burrascano S, Keeton WS, Levers C, Lindner M, Pötzschner F, Verkerk PJ, Bauhus J, Buchwald E, Chaskovsky O, Debaive N, Horváth F, Garbarino M, Grigoriadis M, Lombardi F, Duarte IM, Meyer P, Midteng R, Mikac S, Mikoláš M, Motta R, Mozgeris G, Nunes L, Panayotov M, Ódor P, Ruete A, Simovski B, Stillhard J, Svoboda M, Szwagrzyk J, Tikkanen OP, Volosyanchuk R, Vrska T, Zlatanov T, Kuemmerle T. 2018. Where are Europe’s last primary forests? Biodiversity Review Diversity and Distribution. 24(10): 1426-1439.
• Tchir TL, E Johnson. Deforestation in North America: Past, Present and Future. Regional Sustainable Development Review: Canada and USA.
• UK Parliament. 2021. Environment Act 2021: Government Bill.
• [USDA] United States of Department Agriculture. 2014. US Forest Resource Facts and Historical Trend. Washington DC.
• Vancura V. (2020). The History of European Forest Exploitation. [internet].
• Vayda AP. 1999. Finding Causes of the 1997-1998 Indonesian Forest Fires: Problems and Possibilities. WWF Indonesia forest fires project. Jakarta (ID): WWF Indonesia.
• Vijay V, Pimm LS, Jenkins CN, Smith SJ. 2016. The Impacts of Oil Palm on Recent Deforestation and Biodiversity Loss. Plos One. 1-19.
• Walker. 1993. Deforestation and Economic Development.
• Weiss J, K Shin. 2021. Potential Implications of the FOREST Act of 2021 and Related Developments in Other Jurisdictions.
• Weiss J, K Shin, E Monard, S Tilling 2022. Comparing Recent Deforestation Measures of the United States, European Union, and United Kingdom. [internet].
• Wicke B. 2008. Drivers of Land Use Change and The Role of Palm Oil Production in Indonesia and Malaysia Overview of Past Developments and Future Projections Final Report. Utrecht (NLD): Science, Technology and Society Copernicus Institute for Sustainable Development and Innovation Utrecht University.

FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions)

Journal Download