🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a landmark law that would curb the worldwide crisis of forest loss.

However, the final version of the EU's deforestation regulation, once touted as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, prompting alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"It has been stripped," stated Hugo Schally, citing the removal of key obligations for downstream traders to verify the origin of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

Schally cautioned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

Environmental MEP Marie Toussaint went further, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the hopes of over 1.2 million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the toughest law proposed to combat deforestation."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its green talk. It faced significant delays, ostensibly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP.

In its first draft, the regulation required companies to trace goods back to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," Schally explained. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks."

Intense Lobbying

However, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules.

"Additional intense pressure came from major export markets like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation includes key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said Schally. "Moving obligations upstream, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into complying," said a coffee company executive. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration."

The Commission's Stance

An EU representative defended the outcome, saying: "The commission has responded to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

"The revised regulation provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to effectively enforce this vitally important law."