🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a pioneering law that would combat the worldwide scourge of forest loss.

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 severely weakened state, prompting criticism from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"The regulation was hollowed out," stated Hugo Schally, citing the exclusion of key obligations for downstream traders 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, 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, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

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

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner Frans Timmermans called it "the toughest legislation proposed to combat forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced significant delays, reportedly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a simple IT problem, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint.

Originally, the regulation required companies to track commodities to their specific geographic origin 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 explained. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority less favorable toward green regulations.

"Additional intense pressure came from major export markets like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation features several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders 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 four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it stripped them back," lamented the law's author. "Moving obligations to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," stated 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

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

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