🔗 Share this article

It was a groundbreaking law that would help stop the global scourge of forest loss.

However, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, previously touted as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"It has been hollowed out," said the law's original author, citing the exclusion of key obligations for later-stage companies to verify the origin of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

Green party vice-president Marie Toussaint was more blunt, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome is a far cry from the hopes of over 1.2 million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the most ambitious law proposed to combat forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced significant delays, reportedly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented the Green MEP.

In its first draft, the law required companies to track commodities back to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and hefty fines.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally said. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

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

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules.

"The other pressure came from big trading partners outside the EU," said expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation includes key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," lamented the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also created annoyance for businesses that complied early.

"It is very frustrating because we put a lot of effort into complying," said Xavier Rombouts. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

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

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