🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a pioneering piece of legislation that would combat the worldwide scourge of deforestation.

However, the final version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, once touted as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"It has been stripped," stated the law's original author, pointing to the exclusion of key obligations for downstream traders to check the provenance of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

He warned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

Environmental MEP a leading green politician was more blunt, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the hopes of over 1.2 million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the most ambitious legislation proposed to combat deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, reportedly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked Toussaint.

In its first draft, the law mandated that firms to trace goods to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official said. "These rules were the tool 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 rigorous checks triggered a backlash in the EU capital from multinational corporations, producer countries, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

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

"The other pressure has come from big trading partners outside the EU," noted corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation includes key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A option for more reductions was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources 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

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

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