🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a pioneering piece of legislation that would help stop the worldwide crisis of forest loss.

However, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, previously touted as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, leading to criticism from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"It has been hollowed out," stated the law's original author, citing the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to verify the origin of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

Schally cautioned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and less precise origin data would complicate the task of authorities.

Political Dismantling

Environmental vice-president a leading green politician went further, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome is a far cry from the demands of more than a million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the most ambitious legislation ever put forward to fight forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the EU walking back its green talk. The proposal encountered two major postponements, ostensibly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented the Green MEP.

In its first draft, the regulation mandated that firms to trace goods back to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and hefty fines.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official said. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in Brussels from large companies, exporting nations, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, creating a new political majority more skeptical of environmental rules.

"The other pressure has come from big trading partners like the United States," said corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation features several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations upstream, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

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

"It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into complying," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, saying: "We have listened to feedback and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

"The new text provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to successfully implement this vitally important regulation."