🔗 Share this article

It was a pioneering law that would combat the worldwide scourge of forest loss.

But, the final version of the EU'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 green lawmakers.

"The regulation was gutted," said the law's original author, citing the exclusion of crucial requirements for downstream traders to verify the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

Schally cautioned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

Green party vice-president a leading green politician was more blunt, 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 European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the toughest law ever put forward to combat deforestation."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its green talk. The proposal encountered significant delays, ostensibly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," remarked Toussaint.

In its first draft, the regulation mandated that firms to trace commodities to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and large financial penalties.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official explained. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in Brussels from large companies, producer countries, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules.

"Additional intense pressure has come from big trading partners outside the EU," said expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were mostly exempted from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"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 may be changed. It’s a big frustration."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, stating: "We have listened to feedback and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

"The revised regulation provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to effectively enforce this very important law."