🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a groundbreaking law that would combat the global crisis of deforestation.

However, the final version of the European Union's deforestation regulation, previously touted as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, leading to criticism from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"The regulation was stripped," said the law's original author, pointing to the removal of key obligations for later-stage companies to verify the origin of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

Schally cautioned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

A Watered-Down Law

Environmental vice-president a leading green politician went further, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the hopes of more than a million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the toughest legislation proposed to combat deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. The proposal encountered two major postponements, ostensibly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

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

Originally, the law required companies to track commodities to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official explained. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

However, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in Brussels from large companies, exporting nations, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority more skeptical of environmental rules.

"The other pressure has come from major export markets outside the EU," noted corporate sustainability professor, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation features several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

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

Official Defense

An EU representative supported the final law, saying: "The commission has responded to feedback and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

"The new text provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to effectively enforce this very important law."