🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking piece of legislation that would help stop the worldwide crisis of forest loss.

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

"It has been stripped," said Hugo Schally, pointing to the removal of key obligations for later-stage companies to verify the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

Schally cautioned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and less precise origin data would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

Political Dismantling

Green party vice-president Marie Toussaint 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 stands in stark contrast to the demands of over 1.2 million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 demanding a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the toughest law proposed to combat deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

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

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

In its first draft, the law mandated that firms to track 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," Schally said. "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 strict due diligence provoked opposition in Brussels from multinational corporations, producer countries, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules.

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

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A option for more reductions was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it stripped them back," lamented the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

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

"It is very frustrating because we put a lot of effort into preparing," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

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

"The new text provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to effectively enforce this very important regulation."