🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a pioneering regulation that would curb the global crisis of deforestation.

But, the final version of the EU's deforestation regulation, previously heralded as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, prompting criticism from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was stripped," stated the law's original author, citing the removal of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to verify the origin of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and imprecise sourcing details would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

Green party vice-president a leading green politician went further, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome is a far cry from the hopes of more than a million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a ban on 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 law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, ostensibly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

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

Originally, the regulation required companies to trace goods back to their exact plot of land 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 said. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in the EU capital from large companies, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

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

"Additional intense pressure has come from major export markets like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation features several critical weakenings:

• 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 a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into complying," said a coffee company executive. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

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

"The new text provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to effectively enforce this very important law."