Abstract
Newly made EU Timber Regulation (EUTR) may prima facie look like competing regulation and an overlap of the existing forest certification schemes of FSC and PEFC as also EUTR combats illegally harvested timber. The novel EUTR, however, is a public law scheme wheras FSC and PEFC are private law schemes. Nevertheless, such a dual approach of a hybrid public-private regulation my turn out to be re-enforcing each other and might lead to better environmental norm-setting then only private or only conventional public regulation.
Highlights
In March 2013 the EU Timber Regulation (EUTR) came into force prohibiting the placing of illegally harvested timber on the EU market and requiring traders to exercise due diligence (Regulation 995/2010/EU 2010), and some domestic forest legislation of member states and even subnational legislation might already have given such provisions
Close aim at sustainably produced timber, the regulatory competition reading article 6 on the EU due diligence system (DDS), it becomes is de iure about identical goals. Their competitiveness lies mereclear that certification or other third-party verified schemes may ly in the origin of the regulations: it is public law from the EU and be taken into account in the risk assessment and risk mitigation private law given by forest certification organisations
The new EUTR is basically saying that illegally harvested forest products must not be brought on the European market, while certification merely targets on voluntary standards for sustainable forest management, but both are interrelated by article 6 of the EUTR and could be mutually supportive
Summary
The recent EU Timber Regulation(EUTR) combats illegally harvested timber. it may prima facie appear to compete or overlap with the existing forest certification schemes. In March 2013 the EU Timber Regulation (EUTR) came into force prohibiting the placing of illegally harvested timber on the EU market and requiring traders to exercise due diligence (Regulation 995/2010/EU 2010), and some domestic forest legislation of member states and even subnational legislation might already have given such provisions It illustrates the multi-layered and increasingly concurring legislative practice in modern forest regulation. The Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) and the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) could perhaps be seen as somewhat rival schemes (Heyvaert 2012) allegedly involved in some bitter and even paralysing trench warfare (Visseren-Hamakers and Pattberg 2013) Both FSC and PEFC are as private environmental regulators among the oldest standards worldwide, whereas the public law provision. The question remains whether this duality, i. e., this recent regulatory competition and concurring public as well as private regulation, could be welcomed in terms of good regulation of sustainable forestry
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: GAIA - Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
