Comparison of illegal logging laws in the European Union, the United States, Australia and Japan

The document compares the US Lacey Act, EU Timber Regulation, Australian Illegal Logging Prohibition Regulation, and Japanese Clean Wood Act across definitions of illegal timber, key requirements, regulated parties, product coverage, and enforcement mechanisms.

• The European Union, Japan, and Australia define illegal timber based on breaches of laws in the country of harvest, including national legislation, customary laws, and ratified international conventions. The US Lacey Act differs by referring to all "domestic and foreign laws protecting plants".
• Due diligence or due care requirements in the EU, Australia, and the US are designed to ensure operators obtain information to assess and mitigate the risk of illegal harvesting, with the level of diligence expected increasing for timber from high-risk countries. In Australia, a February 2018 Senate rejection of a 'Deemed to comply' arrangement maintained due diligence obligations for FSC and PEFC certified products.
• Japan's Clean Wood Act differs from the other three frameworks as it contains no prohibition on trading illegal timber and no legal requirement to use legally logged timber, instead requiring "best efforts" to do so. Due diligence requirements in Japan apply only to entities that voluntarily register.

APA

ClientEarth (2018). Comparison of illegal logging laws in the European Union, the United States, Australia and Japan. https://www.clientearth.org/media/ekihjbcd/eu-us-australian-japanese-illegal-logging-laws-comparison-table-ce-en.pdf

Chicago

ClientEarth. Comparison of illegal logging laws in the European Union, the United States, Australia and Japan. 2018. https://www.clientearth.org/media/ekihjbcd/eu-us-australian-japanese-illegal-logging-laws-comparison-table-ce-en.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=ClientEarth |title=Comparison of illegal logging laws in the European Union, the United States, Australia and Japan |date=March 2018 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/ekihjbcd/eu-us-australian-japanese-illegal-logging-laws-comparison-table-ce-en.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{clientearth2018comparison, author = {{ClientEarth}}, title = {{Comparison of illegal logging laws in the European Union, the United States, Australia and Japan}}, institution = {ClientEarth}, year = {2018}, month = mar, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/ekihjbcd/eu-us-australian-japanese-illegal-logging-laws-comparison-table-ce-en.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }