Adaptation to EUTR Requirements: Insights from Slovenia, Croatia and Serbia

Abstract

Eight years after the European Union Timber Regulation (EUTR) came into force, its effectiveness is still unsatisfactory due to deficient and uneven implementation among member states. In addition, some Western Balkan countries have poor legality monitoring systems, increasing the risk of trade in illegally harvested timber. Regardless of this, no recent work has analyzed the adaptation of national forest policies to the EUTR obligations. Our study aims to contribute to the understanding of EUTR implementation by analyzing the adaptation of policies of the Western Balkan countries (Slovenia, Croatia, and Serbia) to the EUTR. Qualitative content analysis was conducted on 22 policy documents from Slovenia, Croatia, and Serbia. Documents were coded using coding categories derived from EUTR. Our results point out that none of the analyzed countries have a policy to directly address illegal logging or prevention of illegal activities. As EU members, Slovenia and Croatia has implemented EUTR through laws. The Slovenian Forest Act addresses all EUTR obligations, while Croatian Law on EUTR Implementation does not directly address the obligation of legality. This obligation is addressed by the Law on Forests. As Serbia is not an EU member, it did not implement EUTR. Nevertheless, Serbian Law on Forests addresses all EUTR obligations, but has some discrepancies regarding Traceability obligation. With ongoing discourses on Green Deal policies and the increasing focus on “deforestation-free” commodities, stricter implementation might be expected of EUTR at EU level. Most countries would probably have to build capacities for EUTR implementation and become more transparent and responsible concerning information availability. To successfully implement EUTR, an increased number of checks as well as stricter fines will be needed.

1. Introduction

Over the last three decades, many efforts have been made to address deforestation and illegal logging. The European Union (EU), United States of America (USA) and Australia, among others, have adopted specific measures to avoid the placing of illegal timber on their markets. To prevent imports of illegally sourced timber and timber products, the EU adopted the Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) Action Plan in 2003 and the EU Timber Regulation (EUTR) in 2013. While FLEGT addresses the supply side (producing countries), EUTR addresses the demand side (importing EU countries). The EUTR obliges importers to implement a due diligence system (DDS) to minimize the risk of importing illegally sourced timber and timber products to the EU.

EU regulations increased awareness of illegal logging in producing and importing countries [1], but the effects of these regulations on the trade of illegally sourced timber and timber products are still debated. Eight years after the EUTR came into force, its effectiveness is still unsatisfactory due to deficient implementation [2]. The implementation of EUTR within EU member states is uneven, which impacts its effectiveness also on market operators and traders. In its 2020 fitness check, the European Commission reported that “while progress has been made in some countries, the current level of technical capacity and resources (both human and financial) allocated to the Competent Authorities often does not correspond to the needs and must be strengthened in most of the member states to increase the number and quality of compliance checks” ([3], p. 11). Furthermore, many reports and studies reveal other gaps in implementation (i.e., information disclosure, weak sanctions, etc.), which need improvements to succeed in a full and effective implementation of the EUTR [2,4]. They call for the EU to strengthen the EUTR implementation and facilitate the removal of deficiencies, stating that uneven implementation by the member states might indicate that “the fight against illegal logging is not considered a high priority by national governments” ([2], p. 19).

EU regulations increased awareness of illegal logging in producing and importing countries [1], but the effects of these regulations on the trade of illegally sourced timber and timber products are still debated. Eight years after the EUTR came into force, its effectiveness is still unsatisfactory due to deficient implementation [2]. The implementation of EUTR within EU member states is uneven, which impacts its effectiveness also on market operators and traders. In its 2020 fitness check, the European Commission reported that “while progress has been made in some countries, the current level of technical capacity and resources (both human and financial) allocated to the Competent Authorities often does not correspond to the needs and must be strengthened in most of the member dtates to increase the number and quality of compliance checks” ([3], p. 11). Furthermore, many reports and studies reveal other gaps in implementation (i.e., information disclosure, weak sanctions, etc.), which need improvements to succeed in a full and effective implementation of the EUTR [2,4]. They call for the EU to strengthen the EUTR implementation and facilitate the removal of deficiencies, stating that uneven implementation by the member states might indicate that “the fight against illegal logging is not considered a high priority by national governments” ([2], p. 19).

Available studies have mainly considered EUTR impacts on markets and trade flows, both within and outside the EU (e.g., [5,6,7]). Borsky et al. (2018), as well as Houghton and Naughton (2017) studied the impact of production sustainability on international trade, focusing on the effect of the International Tropical Timber Agreement on countries’ trade patterns of tropical timber [8,9]. Giurca et al. (2013), Pepke et al. (2015) and Masiero, Pettenella and Cerutti (2015) studied the influence of policy measures on the international trade flows of tropical timber [6,10,11]. They all call for caution about possible policy spillover effects in terms, for instance, of creation of dual markets for certain products and other influences on trade patterns, including, e.g., product or species substitution effects. Jonsson et al. (2015) studied how EUTR and other regulatory measures influenced timber flows involving tropical and EU countries [1]. Buongiorno (2016) analyzed the world trade in forest products, as well as the effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement on the trade of forest products between 12 EU member states [12]. Akyüz et al. (2010) studied the trade in forest products between the EU and Turkey [13]. Morland, Schier and Weimar (2020) applied the gravity model to study global trade flows for 13 types of forest sector products [14]. Becher (2019) found that “the imports, after the enforcement of EUTR, experienced a linear increase, or in case of tropical wood products, stagnation after a previous falling trend” ([5], p. 33). In the southern and eastern Europe, researchers mostly looked into forest certification as a mean for sustainable forest management [15,16], chain of custody certification [17] and trade of timber and timber products [18]

Although EU imports of legally harvested timber increased to some extent as a consequence of implementing specific policies and regulations, it is possible that illegally harvested timber and timber products are sourced and traded domestically, or that the producer countries shifted exports to the countries/regions with less stringent regulations [19]. Among countries at risk of producing and trading in illegal timber, as well as being subject to policy side-effects, are some Western Balkan countries (e.g., Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia). Worries about Balkan countries as a source of illegal timber have been reported, for instance, by Segato (2017), who found that “research into corruption in the forest sector in the Balkans shows that southeastern Europe is a corridor for criminal activity and illegal timber trafficking. A complex supply chain makes it difficult to identify falsified documents, and the lack of robust enforcement–due to insufficient resources–and the cost of compliance to companies means that there is little incentive to adhere to the EUTR. A better understanding of the EUTR, as well as more stringent due diligence systems and risk assessment, is needed to tackle corruption in the region” ([20], p. 13).

In Western Balkan countries, democratic changes took place in the late 1990s and early 2000s, leading to new forest regulatory frameworks, new public procurement procedures, new regulation of private forest companies, stricter financial regulations, etc. In their accession to the EU, Croatia and Slovenia had to harmonize their laws with the EU legislation and its international principles. In this context, the EUTR is part of the body of community law and regulations that need to be incorporated to fulfill EU requirements ([21], p. 1). Slovenia and Croatia aligned their policies and regulatory frameworks with those of the EU and had to implement the EUTR requirements. Serbia is still in the pre-accession process and has yet to adopt EUTR obligations. It is recognized by the European Commission as a priority country for the implementation and enforcement of the EUTR [22]. In addition, all three countries have a significant share of their forest certified by third party verifiers, such as FSC and PEFC [15].

Although Western Balkan countries are regarded as priority areas for improving legality monitoring systems in line with EUTR requirements and aims, no recent work has analyzed the adaptation of national forest policies to the EUTR obligations

Furthermore, no comprehensive study on EUTR implementation in the Western Balkan countries has been performed. Our study aims to contribute to the understanding of EUTR implementation by analyzing the adaptation of policies of the Western Balkan countries (Slovenia, Croatia, and Serbia) to the EUTR. For this purpose, we look into two research questions:

RQ1: How did the Western Balkan countries-namely Slovenia, Croatia, and Serbia-adapt their policies to the EUTR?

RQ2: To what extent and how did they implement the EU requirements?

In Section 2, we outline the EUTR obligations and their implementation within the EU. In Section 3, we describe the research methodology. In Section 4, we provide some basic data on the forest sector for the selected countries (Slovenia, Croatia, and Serbia) focusing on EUTR enforcement. In Section 5, we present the results of our research, arranged according to our research questions. In Section 6, we discuss our findings and draw conclusions. Additional materials are provided in Appendices.

2. EUTR Obligations and Their Enforcement

The EUTR was passed by the EU Parliament in October 2010 and entered into force in March 2013. It covers the demand side for timber and timber products, by prohibiting the placing of illegally harvested timber and timber products on the EU market [23]. EUTR lays down three main obligations for operators who place timber and timber products on the EU market [24]:

(1)

It prohibits the placing of illegally harvested timber and products derived from such timber on the EU market for the first time.

(2)

It requires operators (i.e., those who place timber products on the EU market for the first time) to develop, implement and update a due diligence system (DDS), by obtaining information on the source and legality of timber and timber products, as well as conducting a risk assessment and risk mitigation.

(3)

It requires traders (i.e., those who buy or sell timber and timber products already on the market) to keep records of their suppliers and customers.

Operators can use their own DDS or one provided by monitoring organizations recognized by the European Commission. The task of the monitoring organizations is to assist operators in complying with EUTR requirements. The monitoring organizations develop a DDS, grant operators the right to use it, and check it is used correctly [23]. With this respect, forest certification schemes (i.e., FSC and PEFC) can be used by companies as a complementary tool for proving legality of timber and sustainable forest management. Furthermore, they can be used “also as an influencer in private and public purchasing policies and as a component of emerging wood harvesting and trade legality schemes” [17].

EUTR is legally binding for EU member states. Member states designate one or more Competent Authorities that are responsible for carrying out checks at regular intervals on operators’ compliance with the EUTR, as well as for laying down penalties and enforcing the EUTR. “The institutional structures, legal powers, and status of the designated authorities vary between countries due to their different legal and institutional frameworks” ([3], p. 2). Penalties differ considerably between countries, as well as “the approach taken to ensure effectiveness, proportionality, and dissuasiveness of the penalties applied” [25] (p. 1). The majority of countries impose administrative fines (23 countries) or seize timber and timber products (23 countries). In some countries, criminal fines (16 countries), suspension of trade authority (15 countries), or even imprisonment (17 countries) are applied for breaching the EUTR provisions [25]. In addition, criminal fines by 16 countries, imprisonment by 17 countries, and other penalties can be imposed by 11 countries [25].

In the recent Biennial report, the European Commission recognized certain shortcomings in the implementation of EUTR across the EU and concluded that an “uneven implementation can have potential implications in terms of both the effectiveness of legislation and a level playing field for market operators. In several countries, the number of checks remained relatively low compared to the number of operators, and it is doubtful, whether such a low number of checks can have a truly dissuasive effect across the industry. In addition, further effort should be made to ensure that the scope and quality of the checks carried out reflect a more consistent approach across the EU.” ([3], p. 12).

Several other organizations worry about discrepancies in the formal implementation of EUTR. In its Position Paper regarding EU rules on Illegal Logging published in November 2020, ClientEarth lists several issues about EUTR implementation [4]:

• Lack of staff and financial capacity in the member states;
• Uneven implementation leading to market disruption;
• Satisfactory assistance provided for small and medium enterprises (SMEs);
• The low number of checks conducted by Competent Authorities in the member states;
• Low penalties;
• Non-transparent reporting and disclosing relevant information of the member states;
• Weak cooperation between enforcing authorities within the member states.

Similarly, WWF found gaps in the implementation of EUTR concerning penalties and sanctions, number and quality of checks, follow up of control results and prosecution, resources and staff training, substantiated concerns by third parties, cooperation within and between countries, and transparency of Competent Authorities [2].

3. Materials and Methods

This research presents a comparative case study of three Western Balkan countries, i.e., Slovenia, Croatia and Serbia. A case study is “an empirical inquiry that investigated a contemporary phenomenon in depth and within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident” ([26], p. 18). This research endorses multiple embedded case study design, as it analyzes policies and laws related to the prevention of illegal logging and trade of illegal timber and timber products of three Western Balkan countries. A multiple case study design covers multiple cases and draws a single set of cross-case conclusions. It is thus more reliable and robust than a single case study approach. The embedded design refers to embedded units of analysis within each context [26].

The countries were selected as cases for the analysis as they present a wide range of economic, social and policy conditions [27]. All three export a large proportion of their timber and timber products to EU member states. They also reflect the changes that occurred after the breakup of the former Republic of Yugoslavia and with accession to the EU. Slovenia joined the EU in 2003, Croatia in 2013, while Serbia is still in the pre-accession process. There are therefore also several differences between these countries concerning economic development, social-political stability, and new forest policy and regulatory frameworks. Within each case, units of analysis include policies and laws related to the prevention of illegal logging and trade of illegally sourced timber and timber products, as well as policies and laws related to EUTR implementation.

As policy documents are written plans that prescribe means of actions [28,29,30], we focused on the content of policy documents that are of relevance to the legality of timber and timber products. National policies and regulations related to the prevention and tackling of illegal logging, as well as the trade in timber and timber products, were collected via a literature review and internet search in May 2021. The starting point for the identification of relevant policy documents were the websites of Ministries responsible for forestry in the three selected countries. Those websites contain lists of policy and normative documents that guide the national forestry sectors. After compiling an initial list of documents for targeted countries, other relevant websites were searched, including, among others, the websites of state forest enterprises, chambers of forestry engineers, associations of private forest owners, etc. Finally, a Google search was used to find other relevant policy documents in national languages using a combination of keywords, i.e., “Slovenia”, “Croatia”, “Serbia” and “illegal logging”, “wood processing”, “timber trade”, “European Union Timber Regulation” and “forestry documents”. For Slovenia and Serbia, this search did not yield additional results, whereas for Croatia it resulted in three additional documents not previously identified. The finalized lists of documents for all three countries were cross-checked with 3 national experts on forest policy from Slovenia, Croatia and Serbia. In total, we identified 8 Slovenian, 10 Croatian, and 4 Serbian policy documents. In the case that policies and regulations were not available for consultation through the above-mentioned sources, relevant institutions were contacted and were asked for the documents.

Policy documents were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. This is a technique for the systematic analysis of texts that addresses the content, themes and core ideas in texts [31,32]. “Qualitative content analysis includes contextual information, latent content, as well as formal aspects of the analyzed documents” ([30], p. 149). The software NVivo 12 was used to perform the analysis. All documents were coded in the relevant national language. Coding was performed by using a combination of deductive and inductive coding, distinguishing between coding categories and themes. Based on the content of Regulation (EU) No 995/2010 (EUTR), five main coding categories, and their respective themes were deducted (

Table 1. Deductive and inductive coding categories and themes.

No	Coding Categories	Coding Themes	Code Type	Coding Rules/Explanation
1	EUTR	International commitments	Deductive	Explicit or implicit referral to the EUTR
		Forest protection	Inductive	Referral to forest protection against negative human influences
2	Prohibition	Planning	Inductive	Referral to planning documents about felling, wood transport, or record keeping
		Illegal activities	Deductive	An explicit mentioning of illegal activities of relevance to the EUTR
		Felling	Deductive	An explicit mentioning of felling requirements
		Felling of protected species	Deductive	An explicit mentioning of felling requirements for protected species
3	Due diligence	Certification	Deductive	An explicit mentioning of forest certification
		Wood products	Inductive	Referral to wood products certification or trade
		Wood transport, processing, and storage	Deductive	An explicit mentioning of the requirements for wood transport, processing and storage
4	Traceability	Record keeping	Deductive	An explicit mentioning of required records
		Information	Inductive	Referral to accessibility and transparency of information
5	Implementation	Competent authorities	Deductive	An explicit mentioning of competent authorities
		Monitoring	Deductive	An explicit mentioning of monitoring activities
		Sanctions	Deductive	An explicit mentioning of sanctions, fines, and other restrictive measures

Source: own elaboration.

). During the coding process, several other themes emerged as relevant for EUTR implementation; thus, they were added inductively. Whole paragraphs of the text were coded under relevant themes, and multiple coding of paragraphs was allowed.

4. Forestry in Selected Countries

This section first presents a brief overview of the forestry sector in the selected countries focusing on forest resources, their ownership and tenure, as well as on wood production and the main trade flows, on illegal activities and, finally, on tools for promoting responsible forest management and tackling illegal logging, namely forest certification and EUTR implementation.

4.1. Slovenia

Slovenia is one of the most forested countries in Europe with 1,176,754 ha of forest cover (58% of the territory) [33]. Forests in Slovenia are mainly owned by private forest owners (77%), 20% are state-owned, and 3% are owned by local communities. In 2019, the total volume of forest wood assortments produced in Slovenia was 4,729,000 m³, of which 40% were exported [34]. The main export destinations are Austria and Italy, while the main import partners are Croatia, Italy and Austria [35,36].

All state forests are managed by the state company Slovenski drzavni gozdovi–SiDG [37]. They have been certified according to the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) scheme since 2007, and according to the Program for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) scheme since 2017. In addition to state forests, the SiDG joint forest management (FM) and chain of custody (CoC) certification group includes seven major private forest estates with a total area of 24,346.76 ha, 12 timber traders, 16 sawmills and 32 wood processing companies [38]. Private forests are included in the PEFC regional certification (RCG PEFC). It includes 1196 owners managing 292,722 ha of forests, which represents almost one-fourth of Slovenian forests [39].

In 2019, 2851 illegal activities were recorded for the forest sector on a total area of 577 ha: these figures are similar to those reported for 2018. In 2019, 111 illegal activities (3.9% of the total) were reported as occurring in the forest and forest area, which is slightly less than in 2018 (120). Illegal activities in 2019 were caused by agriculture (13.7 ha), mining (5.5 ha), and urbanization (3.4 ha), while illegal logging due to the building of infrastructure and other causes affected 0.6 ha each [33].

Slovenia has been implementing EUTR since 2013. Forestry inspection (i.e., the Inspectorate for Agriculture, Forestry, Hunting and Fishing [40]) is the responsible organization for carrying out checks on operators placing domestic timber on the market, while the Financial administration of the Republic of Slovenia is in charge for operators importing timber. Summary data on EUTR implementation in Slovenia (and Croatia) are presented in

Table 2. EUTR implementation in Slovenia and Croatia.

	Slovenia	Croatia
Estimated no of operators trading in domestic timber	460,000	600,000
Estimated no of operators trading in foreign timber	1426	3589
Competent authority (CA)	Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Food	Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Finance, Custom office
Annual plan of checks	1	0
Total number of checks on operators planned (domestic timber)	380	0
Total number of checks on operators planned (imported timber):	29	120
Total number of checks on operators undertaken (domestic timber)	611	0
Total number of checks on operators undertaken (imported timber):	29	104
Total number of checks on traders undertaken	177	1
Total number of penalties for domestic timber	n.a.	n.a.
Total number of penalties	n.a.	n.a.
Checks on MO	“Burea Veritas” on 29 March 2017	0
Particularly relevant trade partners	Bosnia and Herzegovina, Russia, Ukraine, Serbia	Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Ukraine
Substantiated concerns	16	0
Human resources (imported timber)	2 full time	3 (this work is performed in addition to other regular inspection work)
Human resources (domestic timber)	14 (this work is performed in addition to other regular inspection work)	1
Budget	n.a.	0
Number of operators who received assistance/training	60	1000

n.a., not available. Source: own elaborations from Slovenian and Croatia national reports on EUTR implementation [41,42].

.

4.2. Croatia

The total area of forests and forest land in Croatia amounts to 275,903,905 ha, equivalent to about 47% of the total national land area ([43], p. 452). State-owned forests represent 76% of all forests, while private forests the remaining 24% ([43], p. 449). According to estimates, there are about 600,000 private forest owners in Croatia. Management is carried out according to 10-year management plans, which are in place for about 70% of private forests [44] and all (100%) state-owned forests. In 2019, the total volume of forest wood assortments produced in Croatia was 13,995,000 m³ [45]. The wood sector is traditionally export-oriented [46] and accounts for about 8% of the total national foreign trade totaling about 1.1 billion EUR in 2019. The leading export market for Croatian products is Italy (21%), followed by Germany (13%), Slovenia (10%) and China (7%) ([47], pp. 17–22). As regards wood imports, the main partner countries for Croatia are Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, followed by Albania, Kosovo and Montenegro [21].

All state forests in Croatia are managed by Public Enterprise Hrvatske šume Ltd. (Zagreb, Croatia) [48] and FSC certified since 2002 ([43], pp. 52–55). In addition to this, there are currently over 250 FSC CoC-certified wood processing companies [49].

Recent documents and official data on illegal logging in Croatia are scarce. In 2020, the Report on Deforestation in the Republic of Croatia was submitted to the European Parliament by the Croatian non-government organization (NGO) VIDRA. The report accuses Hrvatske šume Ltd. Of performing excessive and illegal logging in Natura 2000 areas all over Croatia [50]. The European Parliament responded that “the responsibility for forests lies with the member states, and all forest-related decisions and policies in the EU must respect the principle of subsidiarity and member states’ competence in this field” [51].

Croatia has taken over its obligations for the implementation of EUTR from the date of joining the EU in 2013. However, the Law on implementation of the EUTR entered into force a couple of months before joining. The Ministry of Agriculture is the Competent Authority responsible for carrying out checks of operators, traders, and monitoring organizations [52]. The Ministry of Finance is also included in the process by providing data for checks. Between March 2015 and February 2017, Croatia did not plan or carry out checks on domestic timber, stating that 70% of the domestic forests are state-owned [42] ([53], p. 33).

4.3. Serbia

Serbia has 2,237,511 ha covered by forests which correspond to about 29% of the national land [54]. 57% of forests in Serbia are owned by private forest owners and 43% are state-owned. Private forests are small and fragmented, being owned by approximately 900,000 forest owners [27]; this would correspond to an average size for private forests of about 1.42 ha. State forests are managed by Public Enterprise Srbijasume, and Public Enterprise Vojvodina sume [55,56].

As of April 2021, there are three joint FSC FM-CoC certificates. PE Srbijašume holds two certificates [55] and PE Vojvodinašume holds 1 [57]. The total certified forest area corresponds to 94,809,721 ha. Moreover, a total number of 245 CoC certificates have been issued to companies engaged in wood processing, trade and paper production [38].

In 2020, 3,180,227 m³ of wood assortments were produced in Serbia ([58], p. 39). Wood imports grew by 7.2% since 2019 and total some 373 million United States dollars (USD). Total exports of the Serbian wood and wood furniture industry in 2020 equaled 548 million USD. Imports of softwood sawn timber amounted to 298,999 m³ worth 48.7 million USD ([59], pp. 6–8). Serbia exports wooden furniture to over 30 countries, the main importers being Romania, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Italy, followed by other Western Balkan countries such as Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro ([60], p. 21).

In 2019, 26,678 m³ were illegally logged, while an additional 700 m³ were damaged by human activities ([58], p. 51) including theft of forest assortments, and other damage. Serbia has not yet started implementation of EUTR. In Serbia, as well as in other non-EU Western Balkan countries, EUTR preparations are proceeding slowly. Due diligence standards and systems are not well developed. Unregistered/illegal logging occurs in the country in some instances because of government corruption, administrative procedures needed for felling in private forests, and weak connections between forestry and the wood processing industry. It seems that legality is not considered a priority in the wood processing industry and forestry, as “at present, there are no meetings among forest producers/companies in Serbia to discuss illegality risks” ([61], p. 7).

The PLAC project “Legal harmonization with FLEGT and EUTR—Demands, Needs and Consequences” produced recommendations for improvement of the Law on Forests to be in line with the EUTR Directive. In addition, this project recommended the preparation and adoption of specific legislation related to the timber trade, which should be in line with EUTR. This project also found that FLEGT Regulation is not transposed to national legislation. Currently, the Directorate for forests is engaged in the project Improvement of forest management in Serbia as a contribution to climate change adaptation and mitigation [62]. The specific objective of this project is “to strengthen capacities of the forestry sector in Serbia to be able to implement obligations stemming from EU standards and regulations in the field of forestry and forestry-related fields, including timber market, Forest Information System, subsidies, NATURA 2000 and bioeconomy” ([63], p. 3). The project should be finished by December 2022.

5. Results

5.1. How Did the Western Balkan Countries Adapt Their Policies to the EUTR?

This section provides the results of the content analysis answering our first research question. Results are presented according to coding categories, country by country.

5.1.1. Slovenia

As we were interested in adaptation of policies to EUTR requirements, we identified eight potentially relevant policy documents at the Slovenian national level (

Table 3. Identified policy documents on the national level (Slovenia).

Category	Document Name	Type of Document	Year
Strategic documents	Resolution on the National Forest Program	Resolution	2007
	Forest Development Program in Slovenia.	Program	1996
	Operational program for the Implementation of the National Forest Program	Program	2017
	Action Plan to Increase the Competitiveness of the Forest–wood Chain in Slovenia by 2020	Action Plan	2012
Regulatory documents	Forest Act	Law	2016
	Management of State Forests Act	Law	2016
Guidelines	Explanations on the Record Sheet on The Use and Trade of Forest Wood Assortments	Communication	2016
	Explanations on the Accounting Document	Communication	2016

Source: own elaboration.

). A description of Slovenian policy documents is provided in Appendix A.1, while detailed coding themes are given in Appendix A.2.

Table 4. Coding categories identified in Slovenian policy documents and number of coded references.

	EUTR Commitments	Prohibition	Due Diligence	Implementation	Traceability
Resolution on the National Forest Program	5	5	2	2	0
Forest Development Program in Slovenia	2	4	2	1	0
Operational program for the implementation of the National Forest Program	1	4	1	0	0
Forest Act	1	11	6	17	7
Management of State Forests Act	0	2	0	2	0
Explanations on the Record Sheet on The Use and Trade of Forest Wood Assortments	1	0	1	0	2
Explanations on the Accounting Document	0	0	0	0	3
Action Plan to Increase the Competitiveness of The Forest–wood Chain in Slovenia by 2020	0	4	3	0	0

Source: own elaboration based on Nvivo 12 Matrix query.

provides an overview of coding categories identified in Slovenian policy documents and number of coded references found among them. As Slovenia is an EU member state, it had to translate EUTR obligations into policy and regulatory documents. However, on the national level, there is no policy explicitly related to prevention of illegal logging or other illegal activities (Theme EUTR commitments). Furthermore, none of the strategic documents explicitly mention illegal logging or EUTR. Strategic documents implicitly refer to the obligation of implementing EUTR requirements through fulfilling international commitments, such as ratified conventions and EU regulations [64,65], or forest protection [66].

In Slovenia, EUTR is implemented through the Forest Act, which is the only legal document explicitly referring to EUTR implementation ([67], Article 1a). This document addresses all three EUTR obligations. Document Explanations on the record sheet on the use and trade of forest wood assortments also contains a paragraph dedicated to the explanation of EUTR, and related obligations for forest owners as well as other natural and legal persons that place timber on the EU market for the first time [68]. Illegal logging is implicitly addressed solely by the Forest Act. It does not define illegal logging, but it stipulates that “in forests, any action that reduces the growth of the stand or the fertility of the site, the stability or sustainability of the forest or endangers its functions, its existence or purpose is prohibited” ([67], Article 18).

5.1.2. Croatia

For Croatia we identified 10 potentially relevant policy documents for the implementation of EUTR (

Table 5. Identified policy documents on the national level (Croatia).

Category	Document Name	Type of Document	Year
Strategic documents	National Forest Policy and Strategy	Strategy	2003
	Strategy for the Development of Timber Processing and Furniture Production	Strategy	2017
Regulatory documents	Law on Forests	Law	2018
	Law on the Implementation of European Union Regulations on the Trade of Timber and Timber Products	Law	2018
	Law on Trade	Law	2008
	Ordinance on Remittance of Trees, Marking of Timber Assortments, Consignment Note, and Forest Order	Bylaw	2015
	Regulation on the Auction of Certain Timber Assortments	Bylaw
Guidelines	Instructions for Operators and Traders	Communication	2018
	List of Timber and Timber Products to Which the EUTR Applies	Communication	2018
	List of Protected Species Whose Trade is Restricted or Under Special Supervision.	Communication	2018

Source: own elaboration.

). A description of policy documents is provided in Appendix B.1, while detailed coding themes are given in Appendix B.2.

Similar to Slovenia, Croatia did not adopt new strategic documents that explicitly address prevention of illegal logging or other illegal activities (Theme EUTR commitments). Strategic documents implicitly refer to the obligation of implementing EUTR requirements through fulfilling international commitments, such as ratified conventions and EU regulations. Although the National Forest Policy and Strategy was adopted before Croatia entered the EU, it states that implementation of resolutions and conventions, as well as harmonization of regulations and institutions with EU regulations are a priority task ([69], p. 1676). The Strategy for the Development of Timber Processing and Furniture Production states that it respects guiding principles of sustainable and multifunctional forest management, efficient use of natural resources, and responsibility for global forests, promoting sustainable production and consumption of forest products, but it does not explicitly mention EUTR [70].

Croatia transposed EUTR requirements through the Law on the Implementation of the European Union Regulations on the Trade of Timber and Timber Products, which was adopted in 2018 and amended in 2020 [71]. Although this law refers to the Competent Authorities, professional and inspection supervision, and misdemeanor, it does not fully address obligations of prohibition, due diligence and traceability. Those are addressed in the Law on Forests and other documents (

Table 6. Coding categories identified in Croatian policy documents with number of coded references.

	EUTR Commitments	Prohibition	Due Diligence	Implementation	Traceability
National Forest Policy and Strategy	5	7	4	9	0
Strategy for the Development of Timber Processing and Furniture Production	4	4	0	4	0
Law on Forests	5	2	19	13	6
Law on the Implementation of European Union Regulations on the Trade of Timber and Timber Products	0	0	3	1	1
Law on Trade	7	0	0	0	1
Ordinance on Remittance of Trees, Marking of Timber Assortments, Consignment Note, and Forest Order	6	0	1	7	10
Regulation on the Auction of Certain Timber Assortments	3	0	0	0	6
Instructions for Operators and Traders	1	0	2	0	1
List of Timber and Timber Products to Which the EUTR Applies	0	0	0	1	0
List of Protected Species Whose Trade is Restricted or Under Special Supervision	1	0	0	0	0

Source: own elaboration based on Nvivo 12 Matrix query.

).

5.1.3. Serbia

For Serbia, we identified four relevant policy documents for the implementation of EUTR (

Table 7. Identified policy documents on the national level (Serbia).

Category	Document Name	Type of Document	Year
Strategic documents	Forestry Development Strategy	Strategy	2006
Regulatory documents	Law on Forests	Law	2015
	Law on Foreign Trade	Law	2018
	Rulebook on Consignment and Delivery Note	Bylaw	2015

Source: own elaboration.

). A description of policy documents is provided in Appendix C.1, while detailed coding themes are given in Appendix C.2.

As Serbia is not an EU member state, it did not translate EUTR obligations into policy and regulatory documents. Regardless of this, identified categories in the four policy documents can be implicitly or explicitly relevant for EUTR (

Table 8. Coding categories identified in Serbian policy documents with number of coded references.

	EUTR Commitments	Prohibition	Due Diligence	Traceability	Implementation
Forestry Development Strategy	14	3	3	0	6
Law on Forests	7	11	2	6	6
Law on Foreign Trade	1	0	0	0	0
Rulebook on Consignment, and Delivery Note	0	1	1	4	0

Source: own elaboration based on Nvivo 12 Matrix query.

).

EUTR is implicitly tackled by the Forestry Development Strategy which states that the Government shall “harmonize the future legislative and institutional framework with the requirements of the European Union” ([72], p. 32). It also stresses that “the valid legislative and regulatory instruments do not ensure the adequate protection and enhancement of current forest resources” ([72], p. 10). According to the Law on Forests, protection of forests against illegal appropriation, use, destruction and other illegal activities is the responsibility of the user or forest owner, who is obliged to organize a forest protection service (i.e., the appointment/employment of forest guardians) ([73], Article 39).

5.2. How Did Selected Countries Implement the EUTR Requirements?

5.2.1. Slovenia

In Slovenia, EUTR obligations are implemented through the Forest Act and the Forest Development Program. With respect to the legality of timber logging, the Forest Development Program prescribes that all measures undertaken in forests must be planned ([65], p. 13). According to the Forest Act, forest management plans define the quantitative, temporal and spatial scope of felling, as well as methods and conditions for obtaining wood (Theme Planning). Felling in both state and private forests is performed according to valid forest management plans ([67], Article 13). Before felling, the trees must be selected, marked and stamped by the district forester who issues the Decision on felling ([67], Article 17). Furthermore, according to the Forest Act, it is illegal to transport wood or wood assortments without a valid Accounting document (see Theme Record keeping). The Accounting document issued by the consignor must contain all data required by the EUTR (see Appendix A.2).

The carrier of forest wood assortments must have a copy of the Accounting document after loading and during their transport and has to hand it over to the authorized official for supervision on request ([67], Article 17b). In several cases, including for example sales between two natural persons, an Accounting document is not required (see Appendix A.2 for more details). For forest wood assortments imported from third countries, including other EU member states, the Accounting document is not needed, but the carrier must prove the origin of assortments to the authorized official ([67], Article 17b).

As an optional tool for transparent management of data required by due diligence obligations set by the EUTR, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Food recommended the use of a Record sheet on the use and trade of forest wood assortments and its five-year retention together with the accompanying documents (i.e., felling decision) [68]. The Record Sheet on the Use and Trade of Forest Wood Assortments contains information as required by EUTR (see Appendix A.2 for details).

Forest owners and other natural and legal persons may provide the information necessary to ensure the traceability of timber and timber products and the DDS in other ways, but they must comply with the provisions of EUTR regulation [74]. According to the Forest Act, all forest management plans are documentary material and must be kept permanently. The Decision on felling, Accounting document and Record sheet must be kept for five years, in line with the EUTR obligation of traceability.

The Competent Authorities for the enforcement of EUTR and related secondary legislation (in particular, Regulation 607/2012/EU) are the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food, the Inspectorate for Forestry, and the Financial Administration of the Republic of Slovenia, each of them according to their specific competencies. The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food is responsible for keeping records, exchanging information, conducting inspections of control organizations, and reporting to the European Commission. The Inspectorate for Forestry and the Financial Administration provide the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food with all necessary information [67].

The Resolution on the National Forest Program states that monitoring of forests is carried out by the Forestry Inspection (see Appendix A.1 for more details), and in protected areas also by the Inspection body responsible for nature conservation [66]. The Inspectorate for Forestry (Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food) performs inspection of forest works. The Forest Development Program reports that the number of forest inspectors is relatively low and that private forest owners are the focus of forest inspection [65]. For that reason, in 2006, the Slovenian Forest Service started implementing direct control in nature, i.e., control of forest management including on site/field controls to check compliance with regulations in the field of nature protection ([67], Article 75). Financial administration and the police can also act as inspection bodies in the case of transport of wood or forest wood assortments without an accounting document ([67], Article 75).

For infringements of the Law on Forests, monetary sanctions are prescribed. The amount of fines depends on the type of legal entity that commits a certain illegal activity, as well as on the severity of the activity itself (see Appendix A.2 for more details) ([67], Article 81 and 81a). For the offense of placing illegally harvested timber or timber products on the market, in addition to the prescribed fine, a collateral sanction consisting of the confiscation of forest wood assortments may be imposed. In that case, the supervisory authority seizes forest wood assortments. Transport, storage and disposal of seized forest wood assortments are performed by the company Slovenski Državni Gozdovi, on behalf of the Republic of Slovenia ([67], Article 81c).

5.2.2. Croatia

In Croatia, EUTR obligations are implemented through the Law on the Implementation of European Union Regulations on the Trade of Timber and Timber Products [71]. Although this law refers to Competent Authorities, and their responsibilities it does not fully address EUTR obligations on prohibition. With respect to the legality of timber logging, illegal activities are explicitly addressed by the Law on Forests and the National Forest Policy and Strategy [69,75]. The latter defines the measure of “strengthening the forestry guard service by giving greater powers to prevent illegal activities in forests” ([69], p. 1672). The Law on Forests defines illegal logging as “any felling of trees that is not prescribed by forest management plans”([75], Article 8). Forest management plans are the basic documents for the management and use of forests ([75], Article 27). They make a legal and technical basis for the remittance of trees and felling.

With respect to due diligence, the Law on Forests prescribes that timber forest assortments may be transported only if they are marked and if the prescribed consignment note has been issued for them ([75], Article 37). For manufactured and properly marked timber assortments for which a consignment note has already been issued, a new one may be issued at a later date as specified below. A new (EUTR) consignment note is issued by a licensed forester confirming traceability, in accordance with the EUTR. The sale of timber assortments belonging to the tariff codes 4401 and 4403 and originating from forests managed by the company Hrvatske šume L.t.d.. (i.e., the Croatian National Forestry Enterprise) is performed by auctioning. At the request of other users, i.e., forest owners, timber assortments originating from forests that are not managed by the company Hrvatske šume Ltd. Can also be sold by auctions ([76], Article 1).

The Regulation on the Auction of Certain Timber Assortments prescribes that before offering timber or timber assortments via an auction, a Request for bidding must be submitted to the Committee for the auction. If the request contains all the data, the Committee issues consent for bidding. After the bidding, the Committee draws up a record of the public auction, as a proposal based on which the Ministry of Finance decides on the selection of the bidders who offered the highest price for certain timber assortments and issues a Notice of public auction with a maximum validity of 90 days. The Notice is a document with information on the origin and legality of timber assortments, the right of purchase based on tenders and resale on the EU market and the European Economic Area market, as well as to export timber assortments to third countries. Attached to the Notice is the Specification of timber assortments as listed in the request for bidding and the bid-offer. According to the issued Notice and Specification, and at the request of a legal or natural person who wishes to sell or export timber assortments referred to by the Specification, the licensed forester performs measurement, marking and stamping in accordance with forestry regulations and issues a new (EUTR) consignment note, which is a condition for further transport of timber assortments [76].

Traceability of timber and timber products is regulated by the Law on Forests, according to which forests should be managed transparently, making forest management plans publicly available, and keeping the information on forests available in the national Register ([75], Article 2). The national Register is an electronic record of the whole forest management area of the Republic of Croatia. It represents a unified system of registers of data whose purpose is to ensure effective access to information and support decision-making and management ([75], Article 3). The Register also contains a section for reporting to fulfill international and national obligations set by the EU legislation, international conventions, agreements, protocols and other acts binding on the Republic of Croatia ([75], Article 13).

According to the Law on Forests, all forest management plans must be kept permanently and the evidence on the remittance of trees is to be kept in the Register ([75], Article 30). Besides that, the licensed forester keeps the Remittance book of all trees marked for felling. The Remittance book for state forests is kept by Hrvatske šume Ltd., while for private forests by the Advisory service (see Appendix B.1 for more details) ([77], Article 10). Licensed foresters are obliged to submit a summary table of marked and felled trees to the Ministry of Agriculture once a month. The summary table contains data on the forest owner (name and surname), county, administrative municipality, cadastral municipality, cadastral parcel, and economic unit, as well as data on tree species, assortments and volume ([77], Article 23). Licensed foresters also keep the consignment book which includes all issued consignment notes ([77], Article 20).

Instructions for Operators and Traders state that the economic operator is obliged to keep timely and systematic records of each consignment of imported timber and timber products. Records on all suppliers from whom logs and timber products are purchased, and on all customers to whom logs and timber products are sold shall be kept by economic operators for at least five years [78].

The Competent Authorities for the enforcement of the EUTR are the Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Finance and the Customs Administration [71,75]. The Customs Administration is responsible for receiving FLEGT licenses and keeps records about them, further verifying the consignment covered by the FLEGT licenses, and takes provisional measures where needed ([71], Article 6). The Ministry of Agriculture verifies and accepts the FLEGT licenses, checks the implementation of the DDS by operators, as well as compliance with the traceability obligation of traders within the supply chain. Moreover it reports to the European Commission and determines corrective measures where appropriate ([71], Article 6).

According to the Law on Forests the protection of state forests is performed by the forest rangers. If a forest ranger finds a person who illegally appropriates timber, or other forest products, or performs other illegal activities, (s)he is obliged to establish the identity of that person and temporarily confiscate the illegally appropriated forest products and assets ([75], Article 44). Legal supervision over the implementation of the Law on Forests is performed by the Ministry of Agriculture. Inspection supervision is performed by forestry inspectors from the State Inspectorate. Professional supervision of the quality of work is performed by the Chamber of Forest Engineers at the request of the Ministry of Agriculture or other persons with a legal interest. Inspection supervision in the field of trade is carried out according to special regulations, namely the Law on Trade and the EUTR.

For infringements of the Law on Forests as well as EUTR obligations monetary sanctions are prescribed. The amount of fines depends on the type of legal entity that commits a crime, as well as on the severity of illegal activities (see Appendix B.2) ([73], Article 9–10).

For the offense of placing illegally harvested timber or timber products on the market, in addition to the prescribed fine, a collateral sanction consisting of the confiscation of forest timber assortments may be imposed. In that case, the Customs office seizes them. Transport, storage and disposal of seized forest timber assortments are performed by Hrvatske šume Ltd., on behalf of the Republic of Croatia ([75], Article 94).

5.2.3. Serbia

In Serbia, the EUTR is not implemented through existing regulatory and strategic documents. Illegal logging is marginally addressed by the Forestry Development Strategy which states that the Serbian Government will establish an efficient system of forest protection against illegal felling, illegal occupation, illegal building, and other unlawful actions and efficiently sanction illegal actions related to forests ([72], pp. 38–40). The Law on Forests defines illegal logging as the felling of trees that is not performed according to the forest management plans and prohibits transport and processing of the timber without the stamp. It also prohibits the felling of protected species. Forest management plans provide both technical and legal requirements and guidelines for conducting all operations in forests, including felling (see Appendix C.1).

With respect to the legality of logging, the Law on Forests stipulates that felling of trees in forests can be performed only after selection, marking with remittance stamp, and registration of trees for felling ([73], Article 57). The remittance shall be made by a licensed forester allowed to perform professional activities in forest management. The right to the remittance stamp is issued to an expert employed by a forest owner who manages the forest following a valid forest management plan or is employed by the legal entity that manages the forest. The remittance stamp is assigned by the competent ministry (or other competent institution of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina) to each expert ([73], Article 58). Felling of protected species is prohibited unless they are a source of infection from diseases and pests, or if they endanger people and objects. In this case, the competent Ministry (or other competent institution of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina) must approve felling. Stumps of illegally logged timber must be marked by a licensed forester employed by a legal person (e.g., PE Srbijasume, private company, etc.) with a stamp indicating forest misdemeanor.

With respect to due diligence obligations, the Law on Forests stipulates that felled timber must be stamped and followed by a consignment or delivery note to be placed on the market (bought, sold, donated, stored and transported). Stamping of felled timber and issuance of a consignment or delivery note is performed by the forest owner or the user who manages the forest according to the management plan. It is prohibited to process and store timber if it is not stamped and if it is without a consignment or delivery note ([73], Article 60).

With the aim of creating and retrieving the highest possible value from forest products, the Forestry Development Strategy prescribes to “develop the national criteria, indicators, and guidelines for sustainable forest management pursuant to the Pan-European criteria and indicators of sustainable management and stimulate the voluntary forest certification” ([72], p. 54). Similarly, the strategy prescribes a measure for “creating the conditions for the beginning of the forest certification process for wood products” ([72], p. 62), to create an efficient wood industry sector competitive on the world market. Under the same objective, the strategy prescribes a measure aimed at “introducing the system of production quality control and the harmonization of technical norms in the field of wood industry with the European and international standards” ([72], p. 60).

The Forestry Development Strategy reports that information on the status of resources, measures and activities implemented in forests should be made available to all stakeholders and the public ([72], p. 68).

The Law on Forests prescribes that completed forest management operations are recorded and presented as an integral part of the forest management plans ([73], Article 34). A person who places timber on the market must keep evidence of the stock of sold, processed and bought timber, number of the consignment or delivery note, the name and address of the supplier and buyer of the timber, mark and number of the stamp by which the wood is stamped, types and quantities of timber by assortment, as well as place and date of receipt/delivery of timber ([79], Article 14). The book of consignment or delivery notes must be kept for at least two years, which is not in line with the EUTR requirement of traceability (five years). Data on illegally logged timber are kept in a book of forest misdemeanors.

As Serbia did not implement EUTR, there are no competent authorities for enforcement of the EUTR. The Forestry Development Strategy states that the regulatory, supervisory and supportive functions will be executed by the ministry’s division responsible for forestry. The supervision is implemented through the inspection affairs with the aim of promoting sustainable forest management ([72], pp. 80–82).

The Law on Forests prescribes that monitoring activities in state-owned and private forests are carried out by forest inspectors ([73], Article 107–108). In addition to the forest inspector, the forest guardian is (amongst others) authorized to stop/check a person caught while performing illegal activities, inspect all types of vehicles by which timber is transported as well as documentation that accompanies timber in traffic and report on the illegal activities ([73], Articles 39–41) (see Appendix C.2 for more details).

For infringements of the Law on Forests, monetary sanctions are prescribed. The amount of fines depends on the type of legal entity that commits a crime, as well as on the severity of illegal activities (see Appendix C.2) ([73], Article 111–113).

6. Discussion and Conclusions

Our study points out that none of the analyzed countries have strategic policy documents (i.e., a strategy or action plan) specifically dedicated to the prevention of illegal activities in forestry. Existing policies address illegal logging marginally, without specifying measures for preventing and combating it. This might imply that, in analyzed countries, illegal logging and trade are not currently regarded as “hot” political issues requiring targeted strategies or action plans, which is in line with the WWF findings from 2019 [2]. Illegal logging is referred to in analyzed forest laws, mostly within the description of tasks and responsibilities for forestry inspectors and guards.

Table 9. Summary of policy documents addressing EUTR obligations.

EUTR Obligation	Slovenia	Croatia	Serbia
EUTR implementation	Forest Act	Law on the Implementation of European Union Regulations on the Trade of Timber and Timber Products Law on Forests	Law on forest
Prohibition	Forest Management Plan	Forest Management Plan Consignment Note	Forest Management Plan Consignment or Delivery Note
	Decision on felling
	Accounting document
Due diligence	Record sheet Certification		Book of Consignment or Delivery Notes Certification
		Notice of Public Tender
		Specification of Timber Assortments
		EUTR Consignment Note
		Certification
Traceability	Record sheet	Instructions for Operators and Traders	Book of Consignment or Delivery Notes
		National Register
		Remittance Book
		Consignment Book
Enforcement	Ministry of Agriculture, forestry and Food–Forestry Inspectorate (CA) Financial Administration of the Republic of Slovenia	Ministry of Agriculture Customs administration	Not available

Source: own elaboration.

presents a summary of EUTR obligations and related key documents needed to prove DDS implementation and timber legality in the three targeted countries. Both similarities and differences concerning the EUTR implementation were noticed between analyzed countries. Both Slovenia and Croatia fully implemented EUTR requirements through regulatory documents. Slovenia amended the Forest Act in 2016 and integrated all EUTR requirements. In 2018 Croatia adopted the Law on the Implementation of the European Union Regulations on the Trade of Timber and Timber Products in addition to the already existing Law of Forests. Although Croatia reported the Law on the Implementation of European Union Regulations on the Trade of Timber and Timber Products to be the only reference for the enforcement of the EUTR, we found that the Law on Forests is also explicitly relevant for the EUTR, as it refers to the legality of logging and timber products, as well as to the documents needed for fulfilling the obligations of due diligence and traceability. Serbia has not yet implemented EUTR requirements, but it will have to do in the near future. Although EUTR is not yet implemented, the Law on Forests as well as other regulatory documents show links and connections to EUTR obligations.

In all countries, forest management plans define the legal and technical basis for felling. Legally harvested timber must be accompanied by certain documents which vary from country to country. Ministries responsible for forestry in Slovenia and Croatia also provided guidelines on EUTR implementation explaining the more difficult-to-understand parts of the EUTR requirements.

In order to conduct a full risk assessment, due diligence obligations require operators to collect detailed information on timber and their suppliers [22]. In Slovenia and Croatia, due diligence is proven by several documents and permits that must accompany timber from the logging site to the final destination. All these documents contain specific information about the timber and its origin (see Appendix A.2 and Appendix B.2), but not all of them include general information needed for the risk assessment, in particular with regard to the complexity of the supply chain and the prevalence of illegal logging. As a result, to prove the legality of timber and timber products, operators need to obtain a number of additional documents, e.g., documentation on logging rights, payments for logging, legal rights of third parties regarding the use and possession of land affected by logging, trade and customs-that prove that the timber is legally obtained and traded.

In each analyzed country more than 50% of forests are certified and all countries are aiming to promote forest certification and increase certified forest areas and organizations [16,17,18]. In these countries FSC certification “is, to a certain extent, perceived as a guarantee for the legality of wood operations and origin.” ([15], p. 17). Since certification is desirable as a management and marketing tool but does not represent a sufficient condition for ensuring legality according to EUTR requirements, further cautions are necessary.

The Western Balkans are known as an area exposed to a high risk of corruption, which together with illegal activities is recognized as one of the key problems in the forestry sector at the regional scale [80]. Both Croatia (47) and Serbia (38) show a Corruption Perception Index that is lower than 50 [81], a threshold that is often associated to a higher risk. In this sense, Croatia makes an interesting example. The state forest enterprise, Hrvatske šume, develops forest management plans and manages state forests. At the same time, it is the largest timber operator on the Croatian market, acting as an organizer of timber auctions. This multiplicity of roles might lead to some conflict of interest [82], undermining the credibility of documentation as well as actual legality of timber [83]. Indeed, a recent report on massive deforestation in Croatia accuses Hrvatske šume, as well as administrative bodies for forestry and nature protection, of committing deforestation on large areas all over Croatia, including within Natura 2000 sites.

At the same time, in Serbia and Croatia, numerous protests have been organized by civil society in the last year regarding the issue of timber logging associated with land use changes. An example is given by the Facebook group “Odbranimo reke Stare planine”, i.e., “Let’s protect Stara planina rivers”, aiming to protect rivers in the mountain area of Stara planina against human activities, including logging for the development of skiing facilities and hydropower stations. These events call for increased precaution when dealing with timber from these areas, posing challenges to forest owners and operators in general that, with the strengthening of the implementation of EUTR, will need to prove the legality of timber by several means (i.e., due diligence systems, multiple certification, permits, receipts). While attention paid by civil society organizations and citizens on these issues may ensure some watch-dogging of forestry activities it may also result in additional efforts and costs for operators called to prove the legality of the timber they place on the market.

Transparency, availability and accessibility of information are of critical importance for obtaining the necessary information on timber legality [83]. Yet, transparency of information is still low in some countries. For example, in all three countries forest management plans, felling permits, consignment and delivery notes should be kept permanently as archive material. Some of those documents are publicly available, as this is also a requirement for many documents, such as a summary of the forest management plan, according to FSC standards, while for others a special request and/or administrative fee must be paid. In addition, there is not easily and freely available information about illegal logging in Croatia. There are no national reports or any other documents accessible online that quantify illegally logged timber. At the time of manuscript preparation, Croatia, as well as Slovenia still had not submitted an EUTR Annual report for 2020 to the European Commission. Furthermore, although websites of Ministries responsible for forestry do list documents relevant for forestry (i.e., strategies, laws, etc.) it often happens that those lists are not regularly updated, thus showing old documents, or being incomplete. Finally, not all listed documents are available online. Our findings are in line with recent reports on EUTR implementation which found that Competent Authorities do not regularly publish information on checks and/or breaches detected during control [2,4].

To prove legality of timber, operators in Slovenia and Croatia have to ensure record keeping for at least five years, while in Serbia this period is only two years. As the latter is a discrepancy with EUTR, Serbia will have to change the required duration of record keeping. We see a few possibilities about how this could happen. To comply with EUTR obligations, Serbia will have to opt either for amending the existing Law on Forests, as Slovenia did, or more probably, opt for the adoption of a new, separate law on EUTR implementation (as was the case in Croatia). In any case, it will have to establish a Competent Authority, which will probably be The Ministry responsible for forestry [18]. Most likely, the Inspectorate for Forestry will take over most of the Competent Authority obligations. This will be an addition burden on the already limited capacities of the public forest administration for coercion and monitoring of forest legislation.

Limited capacities of public authorities were also recognized as limiting factors for EUTR implementation [2,4,22]. Our results confirm these findings. Both Croatia and Slovenia have no separate budget for EUTR implementation and invest minimal human resources. They report no cooperation with other EU member states on EUTR implementation. A limited number of checks on operators, traders and monitoring organizations is performed in both countries. In the 2019 report Croatia reported that no monitoring organization is operating in Croatia; thus, checks were not needed [42]. Penalties for breaching EUTR are average in Slovenia and lower in Croatia compared to other EU Member states [3], and mostly stay on the level of notice for remedial actions.

Our findings indicate that the reporting quality of Competent Authorities should also be improved, which is in line with the findings of the European Commission (2020), ClientEarth (2020) and WWF (2019) [2,4,22]. Our research found some inconsistencies between what Competent Authorities reported in their biennial reports for the period 2017–2019, and what is prescribed in laws. While both the Slovenian Forest Act and the Croatian Law on the Implementation of European Union Regulations on the Trade of Timber and Timber Products prescribe seizure of illegal timber and timber products, both countries reported that they cannot apply this measure.

Currently, in all targeted countries, several activities are taking place within the framework of EUTR policies and their implementation, which may be regarded as an indicator of future changes and improvements. In Slovenia, a specific online tool and platform have been developed to improve the connectivity of the forest–wood chain and market conditions (www.mojgozdar.si, accessed 25 August 2021). As a part of the national register, Croatia is currently compiling a register of private forest owners, and a register of companies operating with timber and timber products. In Serbia, a new information system for forestry is being developed, which will also include electronic consignment and delivery notes. In parallel, a new national forest inventory is being conducted to ensure more precise data. Capacities for implementation of the EUTR are being built through the dedicated twinning project “Improvement of forest management in Serbia as a contribution to climate” with the objective of introducing comprehensive sectoral policies to ensure the reduction of illegal activities and the increased resilience of forests to climate change [63].

With ongoing discourses on Green Deal policies and the ambitious EU target to cut CO₂ emissions by 55% by 2030, as well as the increasing focus on “deforestation-free” commodities, stricter implementation of EUTR might be expected at EU level. Most countries would probably have to build capacities for EUTR implementation and become more transparent and responsible concerning information availability. Western Balkan countries will be no exception, and decision makers and forestry professionals, as well as operators and traders, will face new challenges. To overcome them, they will need to learn from existing best practices and improve cooperation. To successfully implement EUTR, a number of checks, as well as stricter fines, will be needed. Those policies [83] will likely not be enough to ensure an appropriate promotion of legality. It seems that for ensuring a better governance of the forest sector effective mix of policy tools (including voluntary ones, for instance, forest certification) is needed. This will need to imply a stricter cooperation among all relevant forest sector actors, both public and private, to identify technically and economically viable solutions for ensuring legality and the respect of existing regulations, while at the same time ensuring competitiveness on domestic and, above all, global markets. More empirical research on the Western Balkans must be performed to understand how operators could respond to EUTR requirements. This may also provide guidance and best practices for other Balkan countries not covered in this study.