🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a landmark regulation that would curb the global scourge of forest loss.

But, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once touted as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, prompting alarm from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was stripped," stated the law's original author, pointing to the exclusion of crucial requirements for downstream traders to verify the provenance 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 less precise origin data 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 printed products – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This outcome is a far cry from the demands of more than a million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the toughest legislation ever put forward to combat forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its green talk. It faced two major postponements, reportedly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

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

In its first draft, the law required companies to trace commodities back to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and large financial penalties.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," Schally explained. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks."

Intense Lobbying

However, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in the EU capital from multinational corporations, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority less favorable toward green regulations.

"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.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it stripped them back," said Schally. "Moving obligations upstream, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also created annoyance for businesses that complied early.

"It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into preparing," said a coffee company executive. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... 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 concerns and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

"The new text ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to successfully implement this vitally important regulation."