🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a pioneering piece of legislation 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 European Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, leading to criticism from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was hollowed out," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to verify the origin of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

Schally cautioned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and imprecise sourcing details would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

Political Dismantling

Environmental vice-president Marie Toussaint went further, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for printed products – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the hopes of more than a million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner Frans Timmermans called it "the toughest legislation ever put forward to combat forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced significant delays, reportedly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked Toussaint.

Originally, the law required companies to track commodities back to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and hefty fines.

"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 opaque production networks."

Intense Lobbying

However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

Experts cite last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, creating a new political majority more skeptical of environmental rules.

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

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," said Schally. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into complying," said a coffee company executive. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, stating: "We have listened to feedback and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

"The new text provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to successfully implement this vitally important regulation."