From Trolleys to Tree Loss

Why does the UK’s consumption still fuel Indonesia’s deforestation?

Imagine grabbing a KitKat or a bottle of shampoo from the shop, totally clueless that it’s 

helping flatten Indonesian rainforests of areas bigger than Manchester.

British supermarkets are stuffed with palm oil, soy, and timber from these rainforests, and the shopping habits keep the chainsaws busy!

 Parliament called it out: agricultural expansion like palm oil plantations is the top driver of deforestation in Indonesia, and UK demand’s right in the mix.

The reliance on globally sourced commodities means the UK’s consumption footprint extends far beyond its borders, making it an undeniable partner in this ecological disaster. What feels like harmless convenience like a packet of biscuits in the trolley, a plastic bottle grabbed on the go, once again highlights, that they are quietly fuelling this devastation that is thousands of miles away. 

Britain is not sitting idle though. In April’s Westminster Hall debate on global 

deforestation, MPs cheered how UK aid’s helped cut Indonesia’s deforestation rates since 2020; we can call it a ‘hard-won success’ that shows the impact of well-targeted support. Yet, obviously the optimism came with warning, mega-schemes like the Merauke rice project that could belch out 782.5 million tonnes of CO2 if they go ahead.

The Papua, where ministers pointed to UK-backed efforts under the Tropical Forest Alliance to make palm oil production more sustainable, alongside support programmes helping small farmers does suggest real progress… but it feels so fragile. 

The Environment Act 2021 was supposed to be the UK’s big move to stop illegally 

deforested goods like palm oil from flooding our shelves, introducing mandatory due diligence for major companies.

The idea was simple: make UK firms legally responsible for ensuring their supply chains are clean. But here are we in 2025, and the key rules to make that happen are still stuck in limbo. It’s frustrating; even MP Barry Gardiner called it downright ironic at COP28, like when the UK was preaching climate leadership while failing to deliver on its own foundational legislation.

Meanwhile, banks like HSBC keep handling billions to companies linked to forest destruction, despite saying they’re against it. On top of that, the UKaid watchdog ICAI has pointed out we’re falling short on actually getting the cash to where it counts in places like Indonesia, and that governance there needs a serious upgrade if we want to truly stop the chainsaws. Although there are promises, the action of the ground itself has been painfully slow, like how the Global demand keeps growing and that economic pressure continues to threaten the gains made on the ground. 

To be fair, we’ve got some wins. The 2023 UK-Indonesia partnership backs their FOLU 

Net Sink 2030 with a new sustainable forest MoU from Lord Goldsmith, plus the 2019 timber legality deal keeping dodgy wood out.

Also, COP29 brought £239 million for forests including Indonesia, honouring our £11.6 billion climate finance to 2025/26. And most Brits are on board too, around 70% want the UK to clamp down on illegal deforestation and clean up its supply chains for good. 

But let's be real; it's talk over trousers. Parliament’s yelling for Environment Act 

deadlines, green trade partnerships with Indonesia, and diplomatic support for Brazil’s Tropical Forest Forever Facility or in short TFFF (a new global fund to protect tropical forests).

Through our strategic pact, the UK should support efforts to help smallholder farmers and promote sustainable palm oil production to ease deforestation that happens. Without laws fully in action, the UK’s net zero chat is just hot air while orangutans lose their homes. Time to match words with wallet or own the hypocrisy. But on the other hand, can Britain really lead on forests whilst its own rules gather dust?