🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a pioneering regulation that would curb the worldwide scourge of deforestation.

But, the final version of the European Union's deforestation regulation, previously heralded as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, leading to alarm from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"It has been gutted," said the law's original author, pointing to the removal of key obligations for later-stage companies to check the provenance of products like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned 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 a leading green politician went further, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This outcome is a far cry from the demands of over 1.2 million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious legislation ever put forward to fight deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its green talk. The proposal encountered two major postponements, reportedly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint.

Originally, the law mandated that firms to track commodities back to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape 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."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority more skeptical of green regulations.

"The other pressure came from major export markets outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation includes key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was established for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said Schally. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance.

"We feel very annoyed 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."

Official Defense

An EU representative supported the final law, saying: "The commission has responded to feedback and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

"The revised regulation ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to effectively enforce this vitally important law."