🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a pioneering regulation that would help stop the worldwide scourge of forest loss.

However, the revised version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, previously touted as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"It has been hollowed out," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion of crucial requirements for downstream traders to verify the origin of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

Political Dismantling

Environmental vice-president Marie Toussaint was more blunt, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome is a far cry from the hopes of over 1.2 million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

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

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its green talk. The proposal encountered two major postponements, ostensibly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

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

Originally, the law required companies to trace commodities to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official explained. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in Brussels from multinational corporations, producer countries, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power less favorable toward 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.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation includes key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders 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 four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it rolled them back," said Schally. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," stated a coffee company executive. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... 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: "The commission has responded to concerns and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

"The revised regulation ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to effectively enforce this vitally important regulation."