Skip to content
Menu
REDD-Monitor
  • Start here
  • About REDD-Monitor
  • REDD: An introduction
  • Contact
REDD-Monitor

European Commission’s forest proposal weakens Paris climate commitment

Posted on 20 July 201620 July 2016

2016-07-20-130631_957x1026_scrot Today the European Commission released its proposal for integrating emissions from land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) into the EU’s 2030 climate and energy package. The Commission’s proposal will allow member countries to emit more greenhouse gases.

The European Commission proposal would allow some EU countries to use emissions cuts from LULUCF to help meet 2030 targets.

In a press release, Hannah Mowat, Forest and Climate campaigner at Fern, says,

“Forests and land in the EU currently absorb more carbon than they emit, which is a good thing. But using this as an excuse to emit more greenhouse gases sends the wrong message. Our carbon budget is rapidly diminishing – we already know we need to go below zero emissions in the medium term. That is where forests can potentially help us; not in delaying the path to zero, as the Commission’s proposal suggests.”

In its press release about the European Commission’s decision, Birdlife International raises the concern that the LULUCF proposal “creates a new impetus for unsustainable use of land in the name of climate change mitigation by strongly incentivizing afforestation without any environmental safeguards.”

Birdlife International points out that “afforestation” often means “intensively managed non-native monoculture plantations”.

FERN released a video in June 2016, explaining why LULUCF matters: “If the European Union decides to mix measuring carbon from forests and land with carbon from burning of fossil fuels, it could be disastrous, leading to less CO2 emissions being reduced overall and doing nothing to protect the forest.”

On 18 July 2016, a group of 11 NGOs, including Fern, WWF European Policy Office, Oxfam International, and Climate Action Network Europe, signed a letter urging the Commission to promote carbon removals from forest and land use in addition to (and not replacing) emission reductions in agriculture, waste, buildings etc:

Carbon removals from forests and land use should be promoted in addition to (and not replacing) emission reductions in the existing ESD [Effort Sharing Decision] sectors. In this way, forests and land will be crucial in helping the EU go ‘below zero’ as most IPCC scenarios show is needed. It is crucial that forests are not used to delay action. Of particular concern are the accounting rules for forest management, which arenotoriously complex and are already leading to hundreds of millions of windfall credits in the current period. Including these credits into the EU’s new instrument would leave the EU wide open to criticism and risks overshadowing the EU’s package as a whole.

Here’s is FERN’s press release about the European Commission’s forest proposal:

FERN

Contact: Hannah Mowat, Forest and Climate, Fern hannah@fern.org
Tel: +32 4 85 025 432

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

European Commission’s forest proposal weakens Paris climate commitment


 
BRUSSELS, 20 July: The European Union’s fight against climate change has been undermined by new proposals for tackling emissions from land and forests. The proposals outlined today by the European Commission for integrating emissions from land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) into its climate and energy package, will allow Member States to emit more, bringing the EU’s headline ‘at least 40 per cent’ reduction target down to less than 39 per cent, when all loopholes are accounted for.[1] “Forests and land in the EU currently absorb more carbon than they emit, which is a good thing. But using this as an excuse to emit more greenhouse gases sends the wrong message,” says Hannah Mowat, Forest and Climate campaigner at Fern, the forest and rights organization.
 
“Our carbon budget is rapidly diminishing – we already know we need to go below zero emissions in the medium term. That is where forests can potentially help us; not in delaying the path to zero, as the Commission’s proposal suggests.
 
“The European Commission has missed an opportunity to embrace the role that forests and land can, and must, play to honour the commitments made in Paris and limit warming to 1.5 degrees. Work must now begin on making the new LULUCF pillar into a powerful instrument with high environmental integrity to ensure that forests and land are part of the climate solution, not part of the problem.”
 
Fern will be doing a rapid analysis of the proposal and the implications on EU climate, forest and energy policy. Do get in touch with us if you would like to receive this analysis. The ESD proposal is available here and the LULUCF proposal is available here.
 
ENDS
 
Fern is a non-governmental organisation (NGO) and a Dutch Stichting created in 1995 to make the EU work for forests and people. Our work centres on forests and forest peoples’ rights and the issues that affect them such as EU consumption, trade, investment and climate change. All of our work is done in close collaboration with social and environmental organisations and movements across the world.
 


[1] 280 million tonnes of carbon dioxide from LULUCF and 100 million tonnes of carbon dioxide from the Emissions
Trading System.
 

 


Full Disclosure: REDD-Monitor has in the past received funding from FERN and the European Commission. Click here for all of REDD-Monitor’s funding sources.

2 thoughts on “European Commission’s forest proposal weakens Paris climate commitment”

  1. Robert Hii says:
    20 July 2016 at 3:45 pm

    Good point made by the NGOs but is it a realistic demand? Jobs and economy always seem to win in these situations

  2. happy forester says:
    20 July 2016 at 6:30 pm

    a ton is a ton is a ton! its the atmospheric impact that matters whether its from a reduction in industrial emissions or by an increased sink. the famous 7% reduction number stated by FERN last year looks pretty silly now….as even this article speaks of 1%

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

SUBSCRIBE!

Recent themes
30x30
Natural Climate Solutions
WWF's conservation scandals
Aviation and offsetting
Conservation Watch

Recent Comments

  • Ben on Response from Kurt Kaiser, Director of Compass Carbon: “Your article was of great concern to us”. And some questions for Kaiser from REDD-Monitor
  • James Mewa Kamaya on Papua New Guinea’s Forest Authority cancels Mayur Resources’ Kamula Doso REDD project
  • Benedikt von Butler on Switzerland’s offsetting deal with Peru excludes REDD. It will still not reduce emissions
  • Chris Ibe on Bar Works: The return of Renwick Haddow
  • Xindia on Bar Works: The return of Renwick Haddow

Recent Posts

  • REDD-Monitor is moving to Substack
  • REDD Project in Brazil Nut concessions in Madre de Dios, Peru finally started paying communities a decade after the project started. “I’m still lacking money,” says one community member
  • REDD-Monitor’s top ten posts in 2022
  • The harsh reality of 30×30: The EU is keen to allow extractivism in the 30×30 target – but not Indigenous Peoples’ territories
  • Human rights abuses against Indigenous Peoples and the proposed “30×30” target

Recent Comments

  • Ben on Response from Kurt Kaiser, Director of Compass Carbon: “Your article was of great concern to us”. And some questions for Kaiser from REDD-Monitor
  • James Mewa Kamaya on Papua New Guinea’s Forest Authority cancels Mayur Resources’ Kamula Doso REDD project
  • Benedikt von Butler on Switzerland’s offsetting deal with Peru excludes REDD. It will still not reduce emissions
  • Chris Ibe on Bar Works: The return of Renwick Haddow
  • Xindia on Bar Works: The return of Renwick Haddow

Issues and Organisations

30x30 AB 32 Andes Amazon Boiler rooms California Can REDD save ... ? Carbon accounting Carbon Credits Carbon Offsets CDM Conservation-Watch Conservation International COP21 Paris Cryptocurrency Deforestation EcoPlanet Bamboo Evictions FCPF Financing REDD Fossil fuels FSC Green Climate Fund Greenpeace Guest post Human rights ICAO Illegal logging Indigenous Peoples Natural Climate Solutions NGO statements Plantations R-M interview REDD and rights REDD in the news Risk RSPO-Watch Safeguards Sengwer The Nature Conservancy UN-REDD UNFCCC Verra World Bank WRM WWF

Countries

Australia Bolivia Brazil Cambodia Cameroon Canada China Colombia Congo Basin region Costa Rica DR Congo Ecuador El Salvador European Union France Gabon Germany Guyana Honduras India Indonesia Kenya Luxembourg Madagascar Malaysia Mexico Netherlands Nicaragua Norway Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Republic of Congo Sierra Leone Spain Sweden Tanzania Thailand Uganda UK Uncategorized United Arab Emirates USA West Papua
©2025 REDD-Monitor | Powered by SuperbThemes!