🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a groundbreaking law that would curb the global crisis of deforestation.

However, the revised version of the European Union's deforestation regulation, once heralded as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, prompting alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was hollowed out," said Hugo Schally, citing the exclusion of key obligations for later-stage companies to verify the provenance of products like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and imprecise sourcing details would complicate the task of authorities.

Political Dismantling

Environmental vice-president a leading green politician was more blunt, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the demands of over 1.2 million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the toughest law proposed to fight forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its green talk. It faced two major postponements, ostensibly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a simple IT problem, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented the Green MEP.

Originally, the regulation required companies to trace goods to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally explained. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks."

Intense Lobbying

However, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power less favorable toward environmental rules.

"Additional intense pressure has come from big trading partners outside the EU," said expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation features several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A option for more reductions was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it rolled them back," said Schally. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

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 preparing," said Xavier Rombouts. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

A commission spokesperson supported the final law, stating: "We have listened to concerns and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

"The revised regulation ensures stability, which is key for business and competent authorities to effectively enforce this very important regulation."