🔗 Share this article EU Deforestation Regulation Largely 'Watered Down' Despite High Hopes Widely celebrated as a landmark law that would help stop the global scourge of deforestation. But, the revised version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, prompting criticism from its original architect and green lawmakers. "It has been gutted," said the law's original author, citing the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to verify the origin of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber. Schally cautioned that fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult. A Watered-Down Law Environmental MEP Marie Toussaint went further, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law. This outcome is a far cry from the hopes of over 1.2 million EU citizens who signed a petition 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 ever put forward to combat forest loss." A Story of Dilution The regulation's dilution has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. The proposal encountered significant delays, ostensibly over technical problems, which drew condemnation. "By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint. Originally, the law mandated that firms to track commodities to their exact plot of land 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," Schally explained. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks." Intense Lobbying However, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in the EU capital from large companies, exporting nations, conservative political groups and EU logging states. Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of green regulations. "Additional intense pressure came from big trading partners like the United States," noted 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: 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 “high risk” scrutiny. "Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms." Uncertainty for Companies The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance. "We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort 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 big frustration." Official Defense A commission spokesperson supported the final law, stating: "The commission has responded to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation." "The revised regulation provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to successfully implement this vitally important law."