It was a pioneering law that would help stop the worldwide crisis of forest loss.
But, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, previously touted as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, leading to criticism from its initial author and environmental politicians.
"The regulation was stripped," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the removal of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to verify the provenance 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 hinder monitoring and legal action.
A Watered-Down Law
Environmental vice-president a leading green politician was more blunt, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.
This outcome stands in stark contrast to the hopes of over 1.2 million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.
When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the toughest law ever put forward to combat forest loss."
From Ambition to Compromise
The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. It faced significant delays, reportedly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.
"By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked Toussaint.
In its first draft, the law mandated that firms to track commodities back to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and large financial penalties.
"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official explained. "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."
Intense Lobbying
Yet, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in Brussels from multinational corporations, exporting nations, conservative political groups and EU logging states.
Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules.
"The other pressure has come from major export markets outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.
Key Loopholes Introduced
The passed law includes key dilutions:
- Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
- A new “low risk” category was created.
- A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
- Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.
"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it stripped them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations upstream, it reduced accountability."
Business Frustration
The delays and changes have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.
"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 major letdown."
Official Defense
A commission spokesperson supported the final law, saying: "We have listened to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."
"The new text provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to effectively enforce this vitally important regulation."
