🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a pioneering regulation that would help stop the global crisis of forest loss.

But, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, once heralded as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, leading to criticism from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"The regulation was gutted," said the law's original author, citing the exclusion of crucial requirements for downstream traders to check the origin of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

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

Political Dismantling

Environmental MEP Marie Toussaint went further, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for printed products – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the demands of more than a million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the toughest law proposed to combat forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its green talk. It faced two major postponements, reportedly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a simple IT problem, the commission opened Pandora’s box," remarked the Green MEP.

Originally, the law mandated that firms to track commodities to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges 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 stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in the EU capital from multinational corporations, 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 more skeptical of green regulations.

"The other pressure has come from major export markets like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, implying the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation features key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations upstream, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into complying," 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."

The Commission's Stance

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

"The new text provides for predictability, which is key for business and national regulators to successfully implement this very important law."