🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a pioneering piece of legislation that would help stop the worldwide scourge of forest loss.

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

"It has been stripped," stated the law's original author, citing the exclusion of key obligations for downstream traders to check the provenance of products like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

Schally cautioned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would complicate the task of authorities.

A Watered-Down Law

Environmental MEP a leading green politician was more blunt, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text stands in stark contrast to the demands of over 1.2 million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products.

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

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, reportedly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," commented the Green MEP.

Originally, the regulation required companies to trace goods back to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official said. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in the EU capital from multinational corporations, producer countries, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority less favorable toward environmental rules.

"The other pressure came from major export markets outside the EU," said expert Andreas Rasche, implying the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

The passed law features several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was established for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it stripped them back," lamented Schally. "Moving obligations upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into preparing," 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 big frustration."

Official Defense

An EU representative supported the final law, stating: "The commission has responded to concerns and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

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