🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a landmark law that would combat the worldwide scourge of deforestation.

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

"The regulation was stripped," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to check the origin of products like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

Environmental vice-president a leading green politician was more blunt, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for printed products – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This outcome is a far cry from the demands of more than a million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the toughest law ever put forward to fight forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

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

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," remarked the Green MEP.

Originally, the regulation mandated that firms to trace goods back to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and hefty fines.

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

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in the EU capital from multinational corporations, exporting nations, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power less favorable toward green regulations.

"The other pressure has come from big trading partners outside the EU," said corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation includes several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A option for more reductions was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also caused frustration 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 big frustration."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, saying: "We have listened to feedback and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

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