🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a landmark piece of legislation that would curb the worldwide crisis of forest loss.

But, the final version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, previously heralded as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, prompting alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was stripped," stated the law's original author, pointing to the exclusion of key obligations for later-stage companies to check the origin of products like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party vice-president a leading green politician went further, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the hopes of more than a million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious law proposed 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 significant delays, ostensibly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file instead of solving a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked Toussaint.

In its first draft, the law required companies to trace commodities back to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official said. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in Brussels from multinational corporations, exporting nations, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power less favorable toward green regulations.

"Additional intense pressure came from major export markets outside the EU," noted corporate sustainability professor, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation includes several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A option for more reductions was established 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 the law's author. "Moving obligations 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 invested significant resources into complying," said a coffee company executive. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration."

The Commission's Stance

An EU representative supported the final law, saying: "The commission has responded to concerns and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

"The new text ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to effectively enforce this very important law."