🔗 Share this article

It was a landmark regulation that would help stop the worldwide scourge of deforestation.

But, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, previously heralded as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"The regulation was gutted," said Hugo Schally, citing the exclusion of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to verify the provenance of products like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

Schally cautioned that fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

Political Dismantling

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

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the demands of more than a million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans called it "the most ambitious legislation ever put forward to combat forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its green talk. It faced two major postponements, ostensibly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented the Green MEP.

In its first draft, the regulation mandated that firms to track goods back 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," the former official explained. "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, exporting nations, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

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

"Additional intense pressure came from major export markets outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting 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 conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it stripped them back," said 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.

"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, stating: "We have listened to concerns and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

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