🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking law that would curb the worldwide crisis of deforestation.

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

"It has been hollowed out," said the law's original author, citing the exclusion of key obligations for later-stage companies to verify the provenance 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 complicate the task of authorities.

A Watered-Down Law

Environmental vice-president Marie Toussaint was more blunt, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the demands of more than a million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the toughest law proposed to combat forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the EU walking back its green talk. The proposal encountered significant delays, reportedly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP.

Originally, the regulation required companies to trace goods to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official explained. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in the EU capital from large companies, exporting nations, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority less favorable toward green regulations.

"Additional intense pressure came from major export markets outside the EU," noted corporate sustainability professor, implying the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation includes key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into preparing," said a coffee company executive. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson supported the final law, stating: "The commission has responded to feedback and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

"The revised regulation ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to effectively enforce this very important law."