🔗 Share this article

It was a groundbreaking regulation that would help stop the worldwide crisis of forest loss.

But, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, once heralded as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, prompting alarm from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"It has been hollowed out," stated the law's original author, pointing to the removal of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to verify the provenance of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

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

A Watered-Down Law

Green party vice-president Marie Toussaint went further, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the demands of over 1.2 million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products.

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

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its environmental promises. The proposal encountered significant delays, reportedly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint.

In its first draft, the law mandated that firms to track commodities to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official said. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in the EU capital from multinational corporations, producer countries, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, 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 commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation features key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "Moving obligations upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

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

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," said a coffee company executive. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

An EU representative defended the outcome, stating: "The commission has responded to feedback and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

"The revised regulation ensures stability, which is key for business and national regulators to successfully implement this very important regulation."