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