🔗 Share this article EU Anti-Deforestation Regulation Largely 'Gutted' Despite Initial Fanfare Originally hailed as a groundbreaking regulation that would help stop the worldwide scourge of forest loss. However, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, once heralded as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, prompting alarm from its original architect and green lawmakers. "It has been hollowed out," said the law's original author, pointing to the exclusion 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 hinder monitoring and legal action. A Watered-Down Law Environmental vice-president a leading green politician was more blunt, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law. This final text is a far cry from the demands of over 1.2 million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a prohibition of deforestation-linked products. At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the most ambitious law proposed to combat forest loss." A Story of Dilution The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. The proposal encountered significant delays, reportedly over technical problems, which sparked criticism. "By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented the Green MEP. In its first draft, the regulation mandated that firms to trace goods to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and large financial penalties. "It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally said. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks." Mounting Pressure However, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in Brussels from multinational corporations, producer countries, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries. Experts cite last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, creating a new political majority less favorable toward green regulations. "Additional intense pressure has come from major export markets outside the EU," noted corporate sustainability professor, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations. The Weakened Final Text In the final legislation includes key dilutions: Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks. A new “low risk” category was created. 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," lamented Schally. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability." Business Frustration The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early. "We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into complying," stated a coffee company executive. "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 An EU representative defended the outcome, stating: "The commission has responded to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application." "The revised regulation ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to successfully implement this very important law."