🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking regulation that would help stop the worldwide scourge of forest loss.

However, the revised version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once touted as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, prompting alarm from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"The regulation was stripped," stated the law's original author, pointing to the exclusion of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to check the origin of products like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

He warned that fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and imprecise sourcing details would hinder monitoring and legal action.

A Watered-Down Law

Environmental vice-president a leading green politician was more blunt, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for paper goods – 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 prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the toughest legislation proposed to fight deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

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

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

Originally, the regulation required companies to trace commodities to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official said. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of green regulations.

"Additional intense pressure has come from big trading partners outside the EU," noted corporate sustainability professor, implying the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it rolled them back," lamented the law's author. "Moving obligations to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," said a coffee company executive. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

An EU representative defended the outcome, stating: "We have listened to concerns and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

"The new text ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to successfully implement this vitally important law."