Skip to main content

Table 2 Indicative comparison of sustainability issues for forest biomass as included in Denmark, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Belgium and the newly adopted EU RED II [44, 45, 66, 73]. The displayed issues are not necessarily named in the same manner in the individual frameworks

From: Implementation of voluntary verification of sustainability for solid biomass—a case study from Denmark

Sustainability criteria Belgium United Kingdom Denmark The Netherlands EU RED II
Legalitya No Yes Yes Yes Yes
Sustainable forest managementb No Yes Yes Yes Yes
GHG emission savings from bioenergy value chainsc Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Carbon stocks and sequestration No No No Yes (carbon debt) Yes (LULUCF accounting)
Indirect effects No No No Yes (iLUC) No
Governmental control Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Start time 2001 2015 2016 2016 2021
Implementation Implemented 2015- 2016-2019 2018-2022 2021-
  1. LULUCF land use and land-use change and forestry
  2. aCovered by the EU Timber Regulation 995/2010 [95]
  3. bThere are differences in the included sustainable forest management criteria, but it is outside the scope of this paper to further analyse these
  4. cThresholds differ among countries