🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a landmark law that would combat the worldwide scourge of deforestation.

But, the final version of the EU's deforestation regulation, previously touted as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, leading to criticism from its original architect and green lawmakers.

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

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and less precise origin data would complicate the task of authorities.

Political Dismantling

Environmental MEP a leading green politician went further, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome is a far cry from the hopes of more than a million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the toughest law proposed to fight forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, reportedly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," commented Toussaint.

In its first draft, the law required companies to trace commodities to their specific geographic origin 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 made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

However, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in the EU capital from multinational corporations, exporting nations, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to 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 big trading partners like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators 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 four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "Moving obligations upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

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 complying," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a big frustration."

The Commission's Stance

An EU representative supported the final law, stating: "The commission has responded to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

"The new text ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to effectively enforce this very important law."