Search

This paper analyses the potential implications of the proposed European Union Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) and the recently adopted United Kingdom (UK) legislation on deforestation-free supply chains (henceforth 'the legislation') for different stakeholders in Brazil. These regulations intend to address global commodity-driven deforestation and forest degradation by ensuring that targeted commodities and products placed on (or exported from) markets are of minimal risk of being associated with - in the EU - deforestation and forest degradation or - in the UK - illegal deforestation. The paper examines potential compliance readiness in cattle, cocoa, coffee, palm oil, soybean and tropical timber supply chains in Brazil, indicating specific challenges that may arise. Through the construction of a "Compliance Likelihood Index", our research provides comparable indications to policymakers on sectors and stakeholders that may need stronger support to meet the requirements, in order to maintain Brazil's access to EU and UK markets. The paper indicates that coffee is the sector with the highest level of incentivization and smallest hurdles for compliance, while the cattle sector may face stronger challenges to rapidly adjust its production system towards a deforestation-free value chain and prove compliance. Results of our analysis also highlight the need for collaboration between the EU/UK and Brazil in order to promote alignment between domestic and demand-side legislations so that they are mutually reinforcing. Results of this exercise, which has a focus on the producer-country view of demand-side legislation, will contribute to discussions on the merits of different approaches to strengthen the governance of deforestation-risk commodity trade. [Display omitted] • Brazil's coffee sector may currently have the greatest likelihood of ready compliance. • Cattle may be the sector to which the regulations may pose the greatest challenges. • The EU and UK should focus on providing financial means and technical assistance for smallholders. • The EU and UK legislation will need to be accompanied by domestic policies and regulations in Brazil. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most European countries have committed to ambitious emissions reduction goals. Energy generation in particular is responsible for more than 30% of global emissions, where significant focus has been placed on renewable energy generation, including biomass. On the one hand, there are countries, like the UK, where the biomass stock is insufficient to meet the demand; on the other hand, there are countries, like Brazil, where the stock significantly exceeds the demand. To promote a natural symbiosis, it is necessary to take on the challenge of transporting biomass through long distances in an environmentally and economically efficient manner. This paper aims to assess the efficiency of alternative pathways of international biomass supply-chains. The alternatives involve different biomass origin regions, transportation modes, export ports and processing technologies, including torrefaction. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) has been used for the first time to assess the efficiency of the alternative biomass supply chain pathways in a Latin American context, considering multiple-criteria relating to economic and environmental performance simultaneously, such as the biomass delivered cost, the environmental impact and the fossil energy consumption. Additionally, a sensitivity analysis was performed to analyse the robustness of the results under uncertainty in parameter values. The DEA approach presented can assist the process of planning biomass sourcing and improve decision-making under multiple decision criteria. The results can support medium- and long-term strategic decisions for decision- and policy-makers. • Efficiency assessment of biomass supply chain pathways between Brazil and the UK. • 56 alternative pathways considered with different supply chain structure. • Data Envelopment Analysis used for multi-criteria efficiency assessment. • Results can support decision and policy making. • Trade-offs between different criteria identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]