🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking regulation that would help stop the worldwide crisis of deforestation.

But, the revised version of the European Union's deforestation regulation, once touted as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, prompting alarm from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was hollowed out," said Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to check the origin of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

Schally cautioned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and less precise origin data would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

A Watered-Down Law

Environmental vice-president a leading green politician was more blunt, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the demands of more than a million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a ban on deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the toughest law ever put forward to fight deforestation."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. The proposal encountered two major postponements, reportedly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," remarked Toussaint.

In its first draft, the regulation required companies to trace commodities to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines 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 made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in Brussels from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

Experts cite last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority more skeptical of green regulations.

"The other pressure has come from major export markets outside the EU," said corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation includes several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened 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," lamented the law's author. "Moving obligations to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into preparing," said Xavier Rombouts. "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 defended the outcome, stating: "We have listened to feedback and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

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