🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a landmark piece of legislation that would combat the global scourge of deforestation.

But, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, previously touted as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"It has been gutted," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to check the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

Environmental MEP a leading green politician went further, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text stands in stark contrast to the demands of more than a million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans called it "the toughest law ever put forward to fight forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the EU walking back its green talk. It faced two major postponements, reportedly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," commented the Green MEP.

In its first draft, the regulation required companies to track commodities to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," Schally explained. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in Brussels from large companies, exporting nations, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules.

"Additional intense pressure has come from major export markets like the United States," said corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was established for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it stripped them back," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

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

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into preparing," said a coffee company executive. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a big frustration."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, stating: "We have listened to feedback and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

"The new text provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to effectively enforce this very important regulation."