🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a groundbreaking piece of legislation that would help stop the worldwide scourge of deforestation.

But, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, once touted as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, leading to criticism from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was gutted," stated the law's original author, citing the exclusion of key obligations for later-stage companies 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, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would complicate the task of authorities.

Political Dismantling

Environmental MEP a leading green politician was more blunt, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the hopes of over 1.2 million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious legislation ever put forward to combat deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the EU walking back its environmental promises. The proposal encountered significant delays, ostensibly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP.

Originally, the law mandated that firms to trace goods back to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," Schally said. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in the EU capital from multinational corporations, producer countries, 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 major export markets outside the EU," said corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was established for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," lamented Schally. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

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

"It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into preparing," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a big frustration."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson supported the final law, stating: "We have listened to feedback and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

"The new text ensures stability, which is key for business and competent authorities to successfully implement this very important regulation."