🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking law that would help stop the worldwide scourge of deforestation.

But, the revised version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, once touted as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, leading to alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"It has been gutted," said Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion of key obligations for downstream traders to check the origin of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

A Watered-Down Law

Environmental vice-president Marie Toussaint was more blunt, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the hopes of more than a million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

At its launch in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the toughest law proposed to fight forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced significant delays, reportedly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint.

In its first draft, the regulation mandated that firms to trace goods to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable 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."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in Brussels from large companies, producer countries, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's EU 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, suggesting the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation features key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A option for more reductions was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it stripped them back," lamented Schally. "Moving obligations to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

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 preparing," said Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

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

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