🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking regulation that would combat the worldwide scourge of deforestation.

However, the revised version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, previously heralded as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, leading to alarm from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"It has been hollowed out," stated the law's original author, citing the removal of key obligations for downstream traders to verify the provenance of products like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and imprecise sourcing details would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

A Watered-Down Law

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

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the demands of over 1.2 million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 demanding a ban on deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the toughest legislation ever put forward to combat deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The regulation's dilution 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, authorities invited political interference," remarked Toussaint.

In its first draft, the law required companies to trace commodities to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally said. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

However, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in Brussels from large companies, exporting nations, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

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

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

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law features key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were mostly exempted from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• 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," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"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 could be altered again. 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 pragmatic and balanced application."

"The new text provides for predictability, which is key for business and national regulators to effectively enforce this very important regulation."