🔗 Share this article

It was a landmark piece of legislation that would combat the worldwide crisis of deforestation.

But, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once touted as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, prompting alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was hollowed out," stated the law's original author, citing the removal of key obligations for later-stage companies 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 make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

Political Dismantling

Environmental vice-president Marie Toussaint went further, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the demands of over 1.2 million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products.

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

A Story of Dilution

The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the EU walking back its environmental promises. The proposal encountered significant delays, reportedly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file instead of solving a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," commented the Green MEP.

Originally, the law required companies to trace commodities to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, 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. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

However, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules.

"The other pressure came from major export markets outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation includes several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category 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 downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

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 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 supported the final law, saying: "The commission has responded to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

"The new text ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to successfully implement this vitally important regulation."