🔗 Share this article

It was a landmark law that would help stop the global crisis of deforestation.

However, the final version of the EU's deforestation regulation, once heralded as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"It has been gutted," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion 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 fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and imprecise sourcing details would complicate the task of authorities.

Political Dismantling

Environmental MEP a leading green politician went further, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text 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.

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

A Story of Dilution

The regulation's dilution has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. The proposal encountered two major postponements, reportedly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

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

Originally, the regulation mandated that firms to track commodities back to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official said. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, 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.

"The other pressure came from major export markets like the United States," noted corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation 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 – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said Schally. "By shifting responsibilities 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.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," said Xavier Rombouts. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... 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, stating: "We have listened to concerns and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

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