🔗 Share this article

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

However, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, once touted as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"It has been hollowed out," stated Hugo Schally, citing the exclusion of key obligations for downstream traders to verify the provenance of products like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

Schally cautioned that fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party MEP Marie Toussaint went further, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the hopes of over 1.2 million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans called it "the toughest law proposed to combat deforestation."

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 revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," remarked the Green MEP.

Originally, the law mandated that firms to trace commodities back to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official said. "These rules were the tool 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 provoked opposition in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

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

"The other pressure came from major export markets like the United States," noted corporate sustainability professor, implying the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

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 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 downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into complying," 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

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, saying: "We have listened to feedback and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

"The new text ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to effectively enforce this very important law."