Will the EU deforestation-free products regulation (EUDR) reduce tropical forest loss? Insights from three producer countries

IF 6.6 2区 经济学 Q1 ECOLOGY Ecological Economics Pub Date : 2024-09-14 DOI:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108389
{"title":"Will the EU deforestation-free products regulation (EUDR) reduce tropical forest loss? Insights from three producer countries","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108389","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The European Union regulation on deforestation-free products (EUDR) represents a policy innovation with important implications for the governance of global commodity chains. We discuss the risks and limitations of this policy derived from an ex-ante assessment of the robustness of its theory of change. For doing so, we use insights from the literature on zero-deforestation commitments and other private standards in value chains and from trade and deforestation patterns in three relevant producer countries (Brazil, Colombia and Indonesia). Despite the potentially positive symbolic effect in mobilizing a global agenda for combating deforestation, the EUDR faces several drawbacks and risks associated with three of its constitutive features: To be demand-oriented, having the value chain as the unit of intervention and holding a high degree of unilateralism. We conclude that to be effective in curbing tropical deforestation, the Regulation must be complemented with international cooperation aiming to strengthen national policies with a territorial approach, as well as social movements addressing the underlying causes of forest loss and human rights violations in the territories where it takes place.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51021,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800924002866","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The European Union regulation on deforestation-free products (EUDR) represents a policy innovation with important implications for the governance of global commodity chains. We discuss the risks and limitations of this policy derived from an ex-ante assessment of the robustness of its theory of change. For doing so, we use insights from the literature on zero-deforestation commitments and other private standards in value chains and from trade and deforestation patterns in three relevant producer countries (Brazil, Colombia and Indonesia). Despite the potentially positive symbolic effect in mobilizing a global agenda for combating deforestation, the EUDR faces several drawbacks and risks associated with three of its constitutive features: To be demand-oriented, having the value chain as the unit of intervention and holding a high degree of unilateralism. We conclude that to be effective in curbing tropical deforestation, the Regulation must be complemented with international cooperation aiming to strengthen national policies with a territorial approach, as well as social movements addressing the underlying causes of forest loss and human rights violations in the territories where it takes place.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧盟无森林砍伐产品条例(EUDR)能否减少热带森林损失?来自三个生产国的启示
欧盟无森林砍伐产品条例(EUDR)是一项政策创新,对全球商品链的治理具有重要影响。我们通过对其变革理论的稳健性进行事前评估,讨论了这一政策的风险和局限性。为此,我们利用了有关零毁林承诺和价值链中其他私人标准的文献,以及三个相关生产国(巴西、哥伦比亚和印度尼西亚)的贸易和毁林模式。尽管《欧盟森林砍伐和退化报告》在动员全球打击森林砍伐议程方面具有潜在的积极象征意义,但它也面临着与其三个构成特征相关的若干缺点和风险:以需求为导向、以价值链为干预单位以及高度的单边主义。我们的结论是,要有效遏制热带森林砍伐,《条例》必须与国际合作相辅相成,国际合作的目的是加强各国的属地政策,而社会运动则是为了解决森林丧失的根本原因,并在发生森林砍伐的地区解决侵犯人权的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ecological Economics
Ecological Economics 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
5.70%
发文量
313
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Ecological Economics is concerned with extending and integrating the understanding of the interfaces and interplay between "nature''s household" (ecosystems) and "humanity''s household" (the economy). Ecological economics is an interdisciplinary field defined by a set of concrete problems or challenges related to governing economic activity in a way that promotes human well-being, sustainability, and justice. The journal thus emphasizes critical work that draws on and integrates elements of ecological science, economics, and the analysis of values, behaviors, cultural practices, institutional structures, and societal dynamics. The journal is transdisciplinary in spirit and methodologically open, drawing on the insights offered by a variety of intellectual traditions, and appealing to a diverse readership. Specific research areas covered include: valuation of natural resources, sustainable agriculture and development, ecologically integrated technology, integrated ecologic-economic modelling at scales from local to regional to global, implications of thermodynamics for economics and ecology, renewable resource management and conservation, critical assessments of the basic assumptions underlying current economic and ecological paradigms and the implications of alternative assumptions, economic and ecological consequences of genetically engineered organisms, and gene pool inventory and management, alternative principles for valuing natural wealth, integrating natural resources and environmental services into national income and wealth accounts, methods of implementing efficient environmental policies, case studies of economic-ecologic conflict or harmony, etc. New issues in this area are rapidly emerging and will find a ready forum in Ecological Economics.
期刊最新文献
Extending the Genuine Savings estimates with natural capital and poverty at the regional and national level in Italy Animal welfare, moral consumers and the optimal regulation of animal food production Is pro-environmental effort affected by information about others’ behavior? Incorporating use values into ecosystem specific accounts: Recreational value generated by saltmarsh at a mixed ecosystem site The biodiversity premium
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1