🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking regulation that would curb the global crisis of deforestation.

But, the revised version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, previously heralded as the crown jewel 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 hollowed out," said Hugo Schally, pointing to the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to verify the provenance of products like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

Political Dismantling

Green party MEP Marie Toussaint went further, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text stands in stark contrast to the demands of more than a million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a ban on deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious legislation ever put forward to combat deforestation."

A Story of Dilution

The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. The proposal encountered two major postponements, ostensibly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," remarked Toussaint.

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

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally said. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in the EU capital from multinational corporations, exporting nations, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of green regulations.

"The other pressure has come from big trading partners like the United States," said corporate sustainability professor, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation features several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," lamented Schally. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

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

"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."

Official Defense

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

"The new text provides for predictability, which is key for business and national regulators to successfully implement this very important law."