🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a groundbreaking law that would curb the worldwide crisis of forest loss.

But, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once touted as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, leading to criticism from its original architect and green lawmakers.

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

He warned that fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would complicate the task of authorities.

Political Dismantling

Environmental MEP a leading green politician was more blunt, 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 hopes of more than a million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 demanding a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the toughest legislation ever put forward to fight forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The regulation's dilution has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. The proposal encountered significant delays, ostensibly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file instead of solving a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," commented Toussaint.

Originally, the law required companies to trace goods to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," Schally 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."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in Brussels from large companies, producer countries, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

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

"Additional intense pressure came from major export markets like the United States," noted expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law features several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators 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 a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," lamented the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"It is very frustrating because we put a lot of effort into preparing," said 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

An EU representative defended the outcome, saying: "We have listened to concerns and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

"The revised regulation ensures stability, which is key for business and national regulators to successfully implement this very important regulation."