🔗 Share this article European Union Anti-Deforestation Regulation Largely 'Dismantled' Despite High Hopes Originally hailed as a groundbreaking regulation that would combat the worldwide crisis of deforestation. However, the final version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, once touted as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, prompting alarm from its initial author and green lawmakers. "It has been stripped," stated Hugo Schally, citing the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to verify the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber. He warned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult. A Watered-Down Law Environmental MEP Marie Toussaint was more blunt, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law. This outcome stands in stark contrast to the hopes of more than a million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products. At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the toughest law ever put forward to fight deforestation." A Story of Dilution The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its green talk. The proposal encountered two major postponements, reportedly over technical problems, which drew condemnation. "By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," commented the Green MEP. In its first draft, the law required companies to track goods to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and hefty fines. "This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official explained. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks." Intense Lobbying However, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in Brussels from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries. Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of green regulations. "The other pressure has come from major export markets outside the EU," said corporate sustainability professor, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks. The Weakened Final Text In the final legislation includes several critical weakenings: Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from submitting due diligence statements. A new “low risk” category was created. A option for more reductions was established for next spring. Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring. "Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," lamented the law's author. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability." Business Frustration The delays and changes have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early. "It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into preparing," said Xavier Rombouts. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a major letdown." The Commission's Stance A commission spokesperson supported the final law, saying: "The commission has responded to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application." "The new text ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to successfully implement this very important law."