🔗 Share this article

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

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 initial author and green lawmakers.

"It has been gutted," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion of crucial requirements for downstream traders to check the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party 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 stands in stark contrast to the demands of over 1.2 million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

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

A Story of Dilution

The regulation's dilution has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. The proposal encountered significant delays, ostensibly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," commented Toussaint.

Originally, the regulation required companies to trace commodities to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official explained. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

However, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in the EU capital from multinational corporations, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

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

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

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation features key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

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

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for businesses that complied early.

"It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into complying," 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

An EU representative supported the final law, saying: "We have listened to feedback and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

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