What changed
The main substantive change is that the Parliament now calls for recognizing low ILUC-risk soybean instead of reviewing Cerrado carbon stock classification. #5 A recital raising concerns about Cerrado classification is removed. #2 The other changes are formal or wording: recital A is reworded and recitals are renumbered. #1#3#4
2 changes of substance, plus 2 formaland1 wording-only. Each change below carries a one-line ✦ note from the same model. Written from the two texts only — read the highlighted passages before relying on it.
The changes to the text itself, in document order. Cover page, citations (“having regard to …”), standard resolution paragraphs and punctuation-only edits are left out — they are in “Show every difference”.
Change #2 Substance
Drops recital H, which raised concerns about the classification of Brazil's Cerrado savanna as high-carbon stock land.
H. whereas the updated scientific data also raises concerns regarding the classification of Brazil’s Cerrado savanna as high-carbon stock land; whereas the Cerrado presents highly heterogeneous carbon stock characteristics; whereas an inaccurate classification of Cerrado land as high-carbon stock land would further inflate the measured ILUC risk attributed to soybean production;
Change #5 Substance
Replaces paragraph (c) on reviewing Cerrado classification with a new (c) on recognizing low ILUC-risk soybean, and drops the old paragraph (d).
(c) the carbon stock classification of Brazil’s Cerrado savanna should be reviewed and revised where appropriate, in order to ensure that the ILUC-risk threshold calculation for soybean is not distorted by the misclassification of heterogeneous savanna land as high-carbon stock land;
(c) for soybean produced within the Union, or in third countries with equivalent and verified standards regarding land-use and deforestation monitoring, provision should be made for its recognition as low ILUC-risk, with the consequent exclusion from the phase-down trajectory, on the basis that such production does not drive the land-use change that the ILUC framework is intended to address;
(d) for soybean produced within the Union, or in third countries with equivalent and verified standards regarding land-use and deforestation monitoring, provision should be made for its recognition as low ILUC-risk, with the consequent exclusion from the phase-down trajectory, on the basis that such production does not drive the land-use change that the ILUC framework is intended to address.