🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a pioneering piece of legislation that would combat the global scourge of deforestation.

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

"It has been gutted," said Hugo Schally, citing the exclusion of key obligations for downstream traders to verify the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and imprecise sourcing details would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

Political Dismantling

Environmental vice-president a leading green politician went further, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text stands in stark contrast to the demands of over 1.2 million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the most ambitious law proposed to fight deforestation."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its green talk. The proposal encountered significant delays, reportedly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP.

Originally, the law mandated that firms to trace commodities to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official said. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in the EU capital from multinational corporations, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority less favorable toward green regulations.

"The other pressure came from big trading partners outside the EU," said corporate sustainability professor, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation includes key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• 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.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented the law's author. "Moving obligations to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

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

"It is very frustrating because we put a lot of effort into complying," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, saying: "The commission has responded to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

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