Roldan Muradian , Raras Cahyafitri , Tomaso Ferrando , Carolina Grottera , Luiz Jardim-Wanderley , Torsten Krause , Nanang I. Kurniawan , Lasse Loft , Tadzkia Nurshafira , Debie Prabawati-Suwito , Diaz Prasongko , Paula A. Sanchez-Garcia , Barbara Schröter , Diana Vela-Almeida
{"title":"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","authors":"Roldan Muradian , Raras Cahyafitri , Tomaso Ferrando , Carolina Grottera , Luiz Jardim-Wanderley , Torsten Krause , Nanang I. Kurniawan , Lasse Loft , Tadzkia Nurshafira , Debie Prabawati-Suwito , Diaz Prasongko , Paula A. Sanchez-Garcia , Barbara Schröter , Diana Vela-Almeida","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":"{\"title\":\"Will the EU deforestation-free products regulation (EUDR) reduce tropical forest loss? Insights from three producer countries\",\"authors\":\"Roldan Muradian , Raras Cahyafitri , Tomaso Ferrando , Carolina Grottera , Luiz Jardim-Wanderley , Torsten Krause , Nanang I. Kurniawan , Lasse Loft , Tadzkia Nurshafira , Debie Prabawati-Suwito , Diaz Prasongko , Paula A. Sanchez-Garcia , Barbara Schröter , Diana Vela-Almeida\",\"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}","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}
Will the EU deforestation-free products regulation (EUDR) reduce tropical forest loss? Insights from three producer countries
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.
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.