🔗 Share this article

It was a pioneering piece of legislation 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 Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, prompting alarm from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"It has been stripped," stated Hugo Schally, citing the exclusion of key obligations for later-stage companies to verify the origin of products like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would complicate the task of authorities.

Political Dismantling

Green party vice-president a leading green politician went further, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for printed products – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text stands in stark contrast to the hopes 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 proposed to combat deforestation."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. The proposal encountered significant delays, reportedly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint.

Originally, the law required companies to track goods back to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official explained. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in Brussels from large companies, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, creating a new political majority more skeptical of environmental rules.

"The other pressure came from big trading partners outside the EU," said expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law features several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it stripped them back," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance.

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into preparing," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration."

Official Defense

An EU representative supported the final law, stating: "The commission has responded to feedback and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

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