Review Process : Search Q&A Submitted since 1995 : View Data List : View Q&A
ID
Question
COA Meeting Number   
COA Meeting start date 25/09/2024
Question by
Section
Answer By
Question Type
Specific Implementation Matter (SIM):
Notification Numbers
Sub-section
Notification Formats
Question full text

Indonesia wishes to follow-up its question AG-IMS ID 108​067 ​as w​e continue to address concerns surrounding the European Union Deforestation-Free Regulation (EUDR), especially regarding the implementation of EUDR that will soon be mandatory. 

Indeed, Indonesia remains concerned that that EU has not provided enough information for the implementation of this policy, and thus leaving producing countries with very short adaption and preparation period.

a. Referring to the EU's response at the previous meeting, it was stated that the commission will develop the country benchmarking system based on the availability of transparent data in the country. How will the EU resolve if there are discrepancies or lack of data availability among importers, manufacturers, and exporters around the sourcing of goods? To ensure compliance, what deforestation standards will be used?

b. Could the EU provide further information about the progress of the methodology developed by the Multi-Stakeholder Deforestation Platform regarding the main criteria for assessment in country benchmarking?

c. How can the EU guarantee that the assessment regarding criteria such as information supplied by governments and third parties (NGOs, industry) is valid?

d. The regulation requires EU businesses placing wood, coffee, cocoa, palm oil, and several other commodities in the EU market to demonstrate that these goods aren’t linked to deforestation. In practice, the burden of supplying data to show compliance will fall largely on suppliers, many from countries where small and medium-sized firms predominate. Although we are currently in the process of registering certain aspects of our small producers related to the EUDR, we would like to proceed at a faster pace since time is short. As such, could the EU provide support and facilitate international cooperation through knowledge, resources, and technological solutions?

e. Has the EU prepared any solutions and assistance aimed at developing the capacities of our regional and local governments, which will be critical in assisting our small producers and exporters in meeting the required standards?
Answer
Answer Full Text

a. b. c. The Commission is currently developing a methodology as per its obligations under Article 29 of the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR). The objectives of the benchmarking are twofold:  a) Allow Competent Authorities to focus scarce enforcement efforts resources. The higher the risk, the more checks enforcement authorities will perform; b) Target our support to areas and commodities where needs are higher. A specific dialogue is foreseen if a country or parts of a country may be identified as possible ‘high risk’.

The process to develop a methodology of the benchmarking is ongoing. The Commission will ensure that the methodology is solid, transparent and based on objective factors. The three-tier system for the assessment of countries and parts thereof will be based on the latest available scientific evidence and internationally recognized sources, as per Art.29. The commission will ensure that the data used for the assessment is solid and robust.

The EUDR relies on internationally agreed definitions (in particular, the FAO’s definition of ‘forest’, i.e. Article 2 of EUDR). Operators and traders will have to ensure compliance with the EUDR requirements. This includes an obligation to ensure that commodities and products they place or make available on the EU market are ‘deforestation-free’ (as per Art.3 (a)

d. The Commission’s work on the methodology is under way. The methodology will be presented in due time.
Follow-up comments

​​Paraguay noted that a reply to question e was not received regarding questions 109112. Concerning the EU's response to point d, Paraguay asked clarification on how the European Commission's ongoing work on methodologies aligned with the stated intention of providing certainty to operators before the EUDR's entry into force, given that only three months remained before implementation. Paraguay further emphasized that any postponement would require legislation, which would not provide the needed predictability. Paraguay highlighted that exporters and European operators lacked crucial information to adapt, especially with only three months remaining in the 18-month preparatory period. Paraguay also requested clarification on the EU's reference to evidence supporting the adopted measures, specifically pointing out that the impact assessment had mentioned the unjustifiable inclusion of rubber, yet rubber was included in the final document. Lastly, Paraguay drew attention to the list of questions it and other Members submitted in document WT/CTE/GEN/33 of the Committee on Trade and Environment, also submitted to the Council for Trade in Goods, the Committee on Market Access, and the TBT Committee. Paraguay hoped that these questions would be duly responded to by the EU to provide necessary predictability for operators. Indonesia noted that several important matters remained unclear. Indonesia highlighted concerns about ensuring that the assessment process would be transparent, fair, and inclusive, particularly in relation to how the EU planned to assist small producers and exporters in meeting the new requirements. Indonesia stressed the importance of scientific evidence and impartial assessments by relevant authorities to guarantee that the process would be balanced and neutral. Indonesia emphasized the need for engagement with national authorities and counterparts from potentially affected producing and exporting countries as a key component of the process. Indonesia suggested involving a third party to work with both the EU and the affected countries to enhance accountability and fairness in the implementation of the EUDR. Indonesia requested further clarification on these points, including a clear timeline for when the methodology would be presented, given the approaching EUDR implementation. Indonesia reiterated that producing and exporting countries would have very limited time to adapt and prepare, warning that such delays could have implications not only for the affected countries but also for the EU if trade disruptions occur. Brazil emphasized the importance of the question raised by Indonesia, which was also supported by Paraguay and Ecuador. Brazil noted that they had cosponsored this question at the beginning of the meeting, as it was a matter of great significance for them. Brazil further noted that they, along with other Members, had requested an agenda item on this issue to be covered later. Brazil also expressed appreciation to India, New Zealand, the US, Canada, and Australia for raising the issue in the Committee on Agriculture. The United States reiterated the concerns it had previously raised bilaterally with the European Union regarding unresolved issues related to the implementation and compliance with the EUDR. The US urged the European Commission to delay the implementation of the regulation and the enforcement of penalties until these significant challenges had been adequately addressed.
AGCD To Complete
Keywords
Collapse Market accessMarket access
Collapse Tariff and other quotasTariff and other quotas
Transparency issues
Tariff quota fill
Product/tariff line coverage
Country-specific allocation
Allocation of licences to importing entities
Period of importation and licence validity
Other administration arrangements
ST Annex 5
Autonomous tariff quota access
Other
Collapse SSGSSG
Transparency issues
Trigger calculations
Perishable and seasonal products
Other implementation issues
Link with TRQ commitments
Other
Collapse Other import policiesOther import policies
Scheduled tariff commitments including tariff renegotiations
Import licensing
Import prohibitions and restrictions (including quantitative restrictions)
Minimum import/reference prices
State trading enterprises
SPS and TBT
Other
Collapse Domestic supportDomestic support
Collapse Transparency issues (including Table DS:2)Transparency issues (including Table DS:2)
Transparency issues (including Table DS:2)
Collapse Annex 2 (Green Box)Annex 2 (Green Box)
General services: research
General services: pest and disease control
General services: training services
General services: extension and advisory services
General services: inspection services
General services: marketing and promotion services
General services: infrastructural services
General services: other
Public stockholding for food security purposes
Domestic food aid
Direct payments: decoupled income support
Direct payments: income insurance and income safety-net programmes
Direct payments: payments for relief from natural disasters
Direct payments: structural adjustment assistance provided through producer retirement programmes
Direct payments: structural adjustment assistance provided through resource retirement programmes
Direct payments: structural adjustment assistance provided through investment aids
Direct payments: payments under environmental programmes
Direct payments: payments under regional assistance programmes
Direct payments: other
Other
Collapse Article 6.2 (Special and Differential Treatment / Development Programmes)Article 6.2 (Special and Differential Treatment / Development Programmes)
Investment subsidies generally available to agriculture
Input subsidies available to low-income or resource-poor producers
Support to encourage diversification from growing illicit narcotic crops
Other
Collapse Article 6.5 (Blue Box)Article 6.5 (Blue Box)
Payments based on fixed areas or yields
Payments based on 85 per cent or less of the base level of production
Livestock payments made on a fixed number of head
Other
Collapse Current Total AMS (Amber Box)Current Total AMS (Amber Box)
Scheduled commitment level
Constituent data and methodology (AGST)
Market price support
Market price support: Eligible production
Other product-specific AMS/EMS
Non-product-specific AMS
Negative support amounts
De minimis
Excessive rates of inflation
Other
Collapse Classification of measuresClassification of measures
Classification of measures
Collapse Export competitionExport competition
Collapse Export subsidies subject to reduction commitments (Article 9.1)Export subsidies subject to reduction commitments (Article 9.1)
Transparency issues
Product coverage/scheduled commitments
Incorporated products
Special and differential treatment (Article 9.4)
Government involvement
Downstream flexibilities (Article 9.2)
Other
Collapse Circumvention of commitmentsCircumvention of commitments
Unscheduled export subsidies
Export credits, export credit guarantees, insurance programmes
International food aid
State trading enterprises
Other measures with circumvention potential
Quantity of total exports
Other
Collapse Export restrictions and prohibitionsExport restrictions and prohibitions
Collapse Transparency issuesTransparency issues
Timely notification
Special and differential treatment
Provision of information justifying the measure
Other
Collapse Importing Members' food securityImporting Members' food security
Importing Members' food security
Collapse ConsultationsConsultations
Consultations
Collapse NFIDCNFIDC
Collapse Quantity and concessionality of food aidQuantity and concessionality of food aid
Quantity and concessionality of food aid
Collapse Other forms of assistanceOther forms of assistance
Other forms of assistance
Product Categories
All agricultural products
Collapse Live animalsLive animals
Bovine
Swine
Sheep and goat
Poultry
Horses
Other
Collapse MeatMeat
Bovine
Swine
Sheep and goat
Poultry
Horses
Other
Collapse DairyDairy
Milk
Milk powders
Butter
Cheese
Other
Collapse Other animal productsOther animal products
Eggs
Hair, Shells, bones, etc.
hides and Skins
Other
Collapse Fruit and VegetablesFruit and Vegetables
Fresh vegetables
Processed vegetables
Roots and tubers
Fruit
Nuts
Processed fruit or nuts
Fruit and vegetable beverages
Collapse Coffee, tea, spicesCoffee, tea, spices
Coffee
Tea
Mate
Spices
Collapse CerealsCereals
Wheat
Corn
Rice
Malt
Coarse grains
Collapse Starches, inulin, gumStarches, inulin, gum
Wheat
Corn
Processed vegetables
Roots and tubers
Other
Collapse Oil seeds, fats and oilsOil seeds, fats and oils
Seeds
Vegetable oils and fats
Fats/Oils of animal origin
Other fats and oils
Collapse Residues of processing industryResidues of processing industry
Wheat
Corn
Animal feed
Alcohol residues
Oilcakes and solid residues
Other residues
Collapse Plants and vegetal materialPlants and vegetal material
Live trees and plants
Cut flowers
Animal feed
Gums, saps and resins
Seeds
Medicinal/perfumery plants
Sugar
Other
Collapse SugarSugar
Cane or beet sugar
Other
Collapse CocoaCocoa
Cocoa beans/powder/butter
Other
Collapse Food preparationsFood preparations
Cereal
Oils
Coffee
Tea
Other
Collapse BeveragesBeverages
Waters
Alcoholic
Other
Collapse TobaccoTobacco
Tobacco
Cigars, Cigarettes
Other
Essential oils, fatty acids and alcohols and other chemicals
Collapse FibresFibres
Cotton
Silk
Wool
Other
Collapse non-Annex 1 productsnon-Annex 1 products
non-Annex 1 products
Question Summary
EU's Deforestation And Forest Degradation Strategy
QnAForm_DeferredAnswerEn
QnAForm_TextDeferredAnswer