🔗 Share this article

It was a groundbreaking law that would combat the worldwide crisis of forest loss.

But, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, previously touted as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was hollowed out," said 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, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would complicate the task of authorities.

Political Dismantling

Green party MEP a leading green politician went further, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the hopes of more than a million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 demanding a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the most ambitious law proposed to combat forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced significant delays, ostensibly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

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

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

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official explained. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

However, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in the EU capital from multinational corporations, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of green regulations.

"Additional intense pressure has come from major export markets like the United States," said corporate sustainability professor, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation features key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were mostly exempted 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 “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into preparing," stated 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

An EU representative defended the outcome, saying: "We have listened to feedback and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

"The revised regulation provides for predictability, which is key for business and national regulators to effectively enforce this vitally important law."