🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a groundbreaking piece of legislation that would combat the global scourge of forest loss.

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

"It has been gutted," said Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion of key obligations for downstream traders to check the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

Schally cautioned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and less precise origin data would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

Political Dismantling

Green party vice-president Marie Toussaint was more blunt, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text stands in stark contrast to the demands of more than a million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the toughest legislation ever put forward to combat forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its green talk. The proposal encountered two major postponements, ostensibly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," commented Toussaint.

In its first draft, the law required companies to trace commodities to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, making them liable 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 ensured enforcement, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

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

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority more skeptical of green regulations.

"Additional intense pressure has come from major export markets outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law features key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it stripped them back," lamented the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," said a coffee company executive. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a big frustration."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, saying: "We have listened to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

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