🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a groundbreaking regulation that would help stop the worldwide scourge of deforestation.

However, the revised version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, prompting alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

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

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would complicate the task of authorities.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party MEP a leading green politician was more blunt, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

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

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious legislation ever put forward to combat forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its green talk. The proposal encountered 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 Toussaint.

In its first draft, the regulation mandated that firms to track goods back to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally said. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

However, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in the EU capital from multinational corporations, producer countries, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

Experts cite last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority less favorable toward environmental rules.

"Additional intense pressure came from big trading partners like the United States," noted expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it stripped them back," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

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

"It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into complying," said Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

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

"The new text ensures stability, which is key for business and competent authorities to successfully implement this vitally important regulation."