🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking regulation that would help stop the global scourge of deforestation.

But, the final version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, leading to alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"It has been gutted," stated Hugo Schally, citing the removal of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to verify the origin 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

Green party MEP Marie Toussaint was more blunt, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text stands in stark contrast to the demands of over 1.2 million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 demanding a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief 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 environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, ostensibly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP.

In its first draft, the law required companies to track goods back to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally said. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in Brussels from multinational corporations, producer countries, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority less favorable toward environmental rules.

"The other pressure has come from big trading partners outside the EU," said corporate sustainability professor, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

The Weakened Final Text

The passed law features key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A option for more reductions was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

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

Uncertainty for Companies

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort 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 defended the outcome, stating: "We have listened to feedback and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

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