🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a pioneering regulation that would combat the worldwide crisis of deforestation.

But, the revised version of the European Union's deforestation regulation, once touted as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, leading to alarm from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"It has been gutted," said Hugo Schally, citing the exclusion of key obligations for later-stage companies to check the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would complicate the task of authorities.

Political Dismantling

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

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the demands of over 1.2 million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 demanding a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the toughest law ever put forward to fight forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. The proposal encountered two major postponements, reportedly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," commented Toussaint.

Originally, the regulation required companies to track commodities to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy 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

However, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in Brussels from multinational corporations, producer countries, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

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

"Additional intense pressure has come from big trading partners like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also created annoyance for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into preparing," said a coffee company executive. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

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

"The revised regulation provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to effectively enforce this very important regulation."