🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a pioneering regulation that would help stop the global scourge of deforestation.

But, the final version of the European Union's deforestation regulation, once heralded as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, prompting alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was gutted," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion of key obligations for later-stage companies to verify the origin of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and less precise origin data would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

A Watered-Down Law

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

This outcome is a far cry from the demands of over 1.2 million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 demanding a ban on deforestation-linked products.

At its launch in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the toughest law proposed to combat deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

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

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

Originally, the law mandated that firms to trace goods back to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," Schally 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 strict due diligence provoked opposition in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Experts cite 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 like the United States," noted expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks.

The Weakened Final Text

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"It is very frustrating 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 major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

An EU representative supported the final law, stating: "We have listened to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

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