🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a landmark regulation that would combat the worldwide scourge of deforestation.

However, the final version of the European Union's deforestation regulation, once touted as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has emerged 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 later-stage companies to verify the provenance of products like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

Schally cautioned that fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

Green party vice-president a leading green politician was more blunt, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the demands of over 1.2 million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

At its launch in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the most ambitious law ever put forward to combat deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, reportedly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

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

In its first draft, the law required companies to track commodities back to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and large financial penalties.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," Schally explained. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding 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 EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of green regulations.

"The other pressure has come from major export markets like the United States," noted expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation includes key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A option for more reductions was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," lamented the law's author. "Moving obligations upstream, 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 invested significant resources into preparing," stated a coffee company executive. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

An EU representative defended the outcome, stating: "The commission has responded to concerns and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

"The new text ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to successfully implement this very important regulation."