🔗 Share this article

It was a landmark regulation that would help stop the global scourge of deforestation.

However, the final version of the EU's deforestation regulation, once touted as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"It has been stripped," said the law's original author, pointing to the removal of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to verify the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

Schally cautioned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

Green party MEP Marie Toussaint was more blunt, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for printed products – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the hopes of over 1.2 million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the toughest legislation ever put forward to combat deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its green talk. It faced significant delays, reportedly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint.

In its first draft, the regulation required companies to track goods to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official said. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in Brussels from multinational corporations, exporting nations, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules.

"The other pressure came from big trading partners like the United States," said corporate sustainability professor, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation features several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it stripped them back," lamented the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance.

"It is very frustrating because we put a lot of effort into preparing," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, stating: "We have listened to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

"The new text ensures stability, which is key for business and national regulators to effectively enforce this very important regulation."