EU Anti-Deforestation Regulation Largely 'Watered Down' After High Hopes

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking piece of legislation that would curb the global crisis of deforestation.

But, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once touted as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, leading to criticism from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"It has been gutted," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to check the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

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

Political Dismantling

Green party MEP a leading green politician was more blunt, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the hopes of over 1.2 million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the toughest legislation proposed to combat forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced significant delays, ostensibly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a simple IT problem, the commission opened Pandora’s box," remarked Toussaint.

Originally, 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 criminal charges and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," Schally explained. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

However, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in Brussels from multinational corporations, producer countries, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority more skeptical of environmental rules.

"Additional intense pressure came from big trading partners outside the EU," said expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

The Weakened Final Text

The passed law features several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" 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," lamented Schally. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," said Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a big frustration."

The Commission's Stance

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, saying: "The commission has responded to feedback and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

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