🔗 Share this article

It was a groundbreaking regulation that would help stop the global scourge of forest loss.

However, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, once 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 green lawmakers.

"The regulation was stripped," stated the law's original author, citing the removal 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, less information collected, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party vice-president a leading green politician was more blunt, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the hopes of over 1.2 million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

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

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, ostensibly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint.

In its first draft, the regulation mandated that firms to track commodities to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and large financial penalties.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official said. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

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

Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules.

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

The Weakened Final Text

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• 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 downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a big frustration."

The Commission's Stance

A commission spokesperson supported the final law, stating: "We have listened to feedback and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

"The revised regulation provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to effectively enforce this very important regulation."