Forests are part of the European collective conscience. They have inspired myths, legends, fairytales, paintings, poetry and films. They are home to countless animals, a place of relaxation and leisure for humans and provide us with a material that is vital to our civilisation: wood. They also evoke that form of killing that has been elevated to the status of a noble art: hunting. And even though Europeans do not generally identify as citizens of the world, they are aware that the Amazonian, Eurasian, African and Canadian forests are critical for the future of the planet. Last summer, we were concerned, as we are every year, at the spread of forest fires, which are no longer the preserve of the southern European Union. Only last week, Portugal was ravaged by these fires, which left seven people dead.
Although 40% of the surface area of the EU is about forests, the word is absent from the successive treaties. The forests are not included among the objectives of the common agriculture policy (article 39 TFEU). The European environmental policy, created in 1987, refers to the “utilisation of natural resources and land use” (article 191 TFEU). Finally, a reading of article 196 TFEU suggests that civil protection aims to be to tackle disasters such as forest fires.
An inter-governmental initiative was taken in 1990 with the creation of FOREST EUROPE, which now brings together 45 countries, the EU and various organisations. Although the experts meet frequently, the competent ministers meet just every four or five years to evaluate progress made in the protection of the forests, as not all of them are in the best of health. The most recent full report available dates back to 2020. Given its level of precision, the EU top brass may ignore it at their peril.
The European Commission would connect with the sylvan dimension in the ‘habitats’ and ‘birds’ directives, the programme ‘Natura 2000’ and the evolving CAP, taking greater account of the natural framework and rural development. The idea of a European forestry strategy first took root at the Council, as this is a matter for the competency of the member states, but some of them were more enthusiastic than others. At the turn of the millennium, the main aim was to protect forests from fires and atmospheric pollution. In 1989, therefore, the Council created a standing forestry committee, which would become the appropriate framework for exchanges of information.
The International Year of Forests (2011) gave the institutions new inspiration. As part of its EU-2020 strategy and its international commitments, the ‘Barroso II’ Commission pushed through a regulation at the European Parliament and the Council aiming to reinforce the monitoring and declaration of greenhouse emissions (May 2013). More specifically, it set about defining a ‘new EU strategy forests and the forestry sector’ (September 2013), based on sustainable and nurturing management, the effective use of resources and taking responsibility for forests at global level. This sustainable management therefore called for improved information on condition of the forests and for the adoption of common principles, with the harmonisation of all relevant parameters: a vastly ambitious undertaking.
The main accomplishment of this period was the regulation of 30 May 2018 concerning not only emissions, but also capture of greenhouse gases resulting from land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF), modifying the 2013 legislation and taking account of the Paris agreements on the climate (2015). The role of forests as carbon sinks, helping to counter emissions, was certainly recognised, but also comes under the general accounting rules in the EU.
As regards the above-mentioned strategy, the assessment report tabled in December 2018 charted the progress made, the studies published and money spent (under the CAP, the ERDF and the European research programme), but the Forestry Information System for Europe (FISE) was still a very long way from being operational. In a recent report (October 2021), the Court of Auditors of the EU concluded that the effects of this strategy were still very limited.
Yet the focus must also fall beyond the European Union. While the area of forests covering the EU has increased in the recent past, deforestation remains rampant in the rest of the world. According to the FAO, 420 million hectares of forest were lost between 1990 and 2020. The Europeans would not remain indifferent to this major destruction and the loss of biodiversity it brought in its wake. As a champion of development aid, the EU established financial instruments to promote reforestation and the sustainable management of forests, together with an action plan to tackle the illegal exploitation of forests. It has long been working with UN agencies such as the FAO and the United Nations Forum on Forests.
October 2010 saw the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council requiring operators to reduce the risk of importing illegally harvested wood into the EU. Then, over the next decade, several Parliament resolutions were dedicated to the planetary issue of forests, which cover 30% of the Earth’s surface and are home to 80% of its biodiversity.
In July 2019, the ‘Juncker’ Commission published an important communication setting out to bolster the EU’s activities to protect and restore the planet’s forests. This document, which was prepared diligently by numerous studies and consultations, containing masses of statistics and cartography, deserved greater visibility than it received, eclipsed by the political transition underway at the time. It highlighted the role of European importers and consumers in the deforestation of third countries.
Indeed, while the EU obviously imports wood, it also imports meat, palm oil, soya, cocoa, corn, rubber; when it included these processed products and services, the Commission reached the conclusion that the EU consumes 10% of global deforestation. It therefore became necessary to encourage individuals to consume products from ‘zero-deforestation’ supply chains. There have, however, been no legislative proposals.
In December 2019, virtually before the ink on their contracts was dry, the ‘von der Leyen’ Commission presented its ‘Green Pact for Europe’. Then, in March 2020, in the framework of its promotion of the circular economy, it undertook to draw up a regulatory framework for the certification of carbon absorption.
The ‘Climate Law’ (regulation of 30 June 2021) summed up the matter at hand: ‘the triple role of forests, namely, as carbon sinks, storage and substitution, contributes to the reduction of greenhouse gases in the environment, while ensuring that forests continue to grow and provide many other services’ (recital 23). Never before had any natural element had such an important role to play (to be continued).
Renaud Denuit