🔗 Share this article

It was a groundbreaking piece of legislation that would combat the global crisis of deforestation.

But, the revised version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, previously touted as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was stripped," said Hugo Schally, citing the removal of key obligations for downstream traders to verify the origin of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

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

Political Dismantling

Environmental MEP Marie Toussaint went further, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

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

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the toughest legislation proposed to fight deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, ostensibly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file instead of solving a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," commented the Green MEP.

Originally, the law mandated that firms to track commodities to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official said. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

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 EU elections as a decisive moment, 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 EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

The passed law features several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• 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 stripped them back," lamented Schally. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance.

"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 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 feedback and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

"The new text provides for predictability, which is key for business and national regulators to effectively enforce this very important law."