🔗 Share this article

It was a groundbreaking law that would curb the worldwide crisis of forest loss.

But, the final version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, previously touted as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, prompting alarm from its original architect and green lawmakers.

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

He warned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party vice-president Marie Toussaint went further, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome is a far cry from the demands of over 1.2 million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 demanding a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the most ambitious legislation proposed to fight forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its green talk. The proposal encountered significant delays, reportedly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," remarked Toussaint.

Originally, the law required companies to track goods to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," Schally said. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, created a verifiable paper trail, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks."

Intense Lobbying

However, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in the EU capital from multinational corporations, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority less favorable toward green regulations.

"The other pressure came from big trading partners outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation includes key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also caused frustration 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 may be changed. It’s a big frustration."

Official Defense

An EU representative supported the final law, saying: "The commission has responded to feedback and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

"The revised regulation ensures stability, which is key for business and competent authorities to effectively enforce this very important law."