EU Anti-Deforestation Regulation Effectively 'Watered Down' After Initial Fanfare

Widely celebrated as a pioneering piece of legislation that would combat the global scourge of deforestation.

But, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, once touted as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, prompting alarm from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was stripped," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to check the provenance of products like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

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

Political Dismantling

Environmental MEP a leading green politician was more blunt, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

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

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the toughest law ever put forward to combat deforestation."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its green talk. It faced significant delays, reportedly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," commented Toussaint.

Originally, the regulation mandated that firms to trace commodities back to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official explained. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in Brussels from multinational corporations, producer countries, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power less favorable toward environmental rules.

"Additional intense pressure came from major export markets like the United States," noted expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

The passed law features several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it stripped them back," lamented the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance.

"It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into preparing," stated a coffee company executive. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

An EU representative defended the outcome, saying: "The commission has responded 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 very important regulation."