🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking piece of legislation that would combat the worldwide crisis of deforestation.

However, the revised version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, prompting criticism from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"The regulation was gutted," stated the law's original author, pointing to the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to verify the provenance of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

Schally cautioned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and less precise origin data would complicate the task of authorities.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party MEP a leading green politician went further, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This outcome is a far cry from the demands of over 1.2 million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious law ever put forward to fight forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. The proposal encountered two major postponements, ostensibly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP.

Originally, the regulation mandated that firms 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 large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally said. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

However, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority more skeptical of green regulations.

"Additional intense pressure has come from big trading partners like the United States," noted expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation features key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into preparing," stated a coffee company executive. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

An EU representative defended the outcome, saying: "The commission has responded to feedback and taken action 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."