🔗 Share this article

It was a landmark regulation that would combat the global scourge of deforestation.

But, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, leading to alarm from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"The regulation was gutted," stated the law's original author, pointing to the removal of crucial requirements 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, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would complicate the task of authorities.

Political Dismantling

Environmental vice-president a leading green politician went further, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

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

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner Frans Timmermans called it "the most ambitious law proposed to combat forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. It faced significant delays, ostensibly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a simple IT problem, the commission opened Pandora’s box," remarked Toussaint.

Originally, the regulation required companies to trace commodities to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official explained. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

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

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules.

"The other pressure has come from big trading partners like the United States," said corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks.

The Weakened Final Text

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"It is very frustrating because we put a lot of effort into preparing," said a coffee company executive. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration."

The Commission's Stance

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

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