Was it produced legally? Part 2: Implementing the legality requirement

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The document outlines the challenges of verifying legal compliance in global agricultural supply chains under the EUDR. It argues that official documentation and third-party certifications are often insufficient due to systemic corruption, land-grabbing, and informality. Through case studies of Brazil, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, and Indonesia, it highlights specific risks such as illegal deforestation in the Amazon and Cerrado, child labour in cocoa production, and the widespread lack of mandatory ISPO certification in Indonesia's palm oil sector. It recommends that EU operators consult local experts and civil society to verify the 'reality on the ground'.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The EUDR legality requirement is interpreted as encompassing all laws in the producing country that affect the legal status of activities used to produce relevant commodities, including pre- and post-production activities and their effects on the surrounding area of production.
  • Systemic risks across producing countries include gaps in land governance, weak law enforcement, corruption, and the high prevalence of informal agricultural activities, which often lack formal documentation.
  • In Brazil, land grabbing is a prevalent risk, with nearly 30% of unallocated public forests covered by illegal Rural Environmental Registrations (CAR) used to simulate rights over public or third-party land.
  • Illegal deforestation is widespread in Brazil; a study found that 91% of forest clearing in the Amazon and 51% in the Cerrado lacked legal authorisation between August 2023 and July 2024.
  • The Brazilian soy sector faces significant legality risks, with research indicating that 74% of soy production in the Amazon and Cerrado involves actual or potential non-compliance with the Forest Code.
  • In Côte d’Ivoire, approximately 30% of cocoa is estimated to originate from protected 'classified' forests where agricultural activities are prohibited.
  • Child labour remains a significant risk in West African cocoa production, with an estimated 790,000 children working in cocoa production in Côte d’Ivoire and 770,000 in Ghana as of 2020.
  • Ghanaian cocoa production frequently encroaches on forest reserves, and the Forestry Commission reports that most 'admitted farms' have expanded their boundaries by 70% to 400%.
  • In Indonesia, non-compliance with the mandatory Indonesia Sustainable Palm Oil (ISPO) certification is systemic, with reports suggesting roughly half of productive plantations lack the required certification.
  • Indonesian palm oil production is plagued by administrative irregularities; a 2019 National Audit Board (BPK) finding suggested approximately 81% of oil palm plantations were non-compliant with regulatory requirements.
  • EU operators are advised not to rely solely on official records or third-party certifications, as these can be falsified or fail to capture the reality of local land-use and labour violations.

Cite the original document

APA
Rice, M., & Godts, R. (2025). Was it produced legally? Part 2: Implementing the legality requirement. ClientEarth. https://www.clientearth.org/media/bnxfkmuu/was-it-produced-legally_part-2_clientearth_april-2025.pdf
Chicago
Rice, Michael, and Raphaëlle Godts. Was it produced legally? Part 2: Implementing the legality requirement. ClientEarth, 2025. https://www.clientearth.org/media/bnxfkmuu/was-it-produced-legally_part-2_clientearth_april-2025.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Rice |first1=Michael |last2=Godts |first2=Raphaëlle |title=Was it produced legally? Part 2: Implementing the legality requirement |publisher=ClientEarth |date=April 2025 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/bnxfkmuu/was-it-produced-legally_part-2_clientearth_april-2025.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{rice2025was, author = {Rice, Michael and Godts, Raphaëlle}, title = {{Was it produced legally? Part 2: Implementing the legality requirement}}, institution = {ClientEarth}, year = {2025}, month = apr, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/bnxfkmuu/was-it-produced-legally_part-2_clientearth_april-2025.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated