🔗 Share this article

It was a groundbreaking piece of legislation that would curb the worldwide crisis of deforestation.

However, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, prompting criticism from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was gutted," stated the law's original author, citing the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders 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 imprecise sourcing details would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

Green party MEP a leading green politician went further, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

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

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans called it "the most ambitious legislation ever put forward to fight deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the EU walking back its green talk. It faced 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," remarked the Green MEP.

In its first draft, the regulation required companies to trace commodities back to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally said. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, created a verifiable paper trail, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in Brussels from multinational corporations, producer countries, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules.

"The other pressure came from major export markets outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law features key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it stripped them back," said Schally. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

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

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort 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 major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

A commission spokesperson supported the final law, stating: "The commission has responded to concerns and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

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