🔗 Share this article EU Deforestation Law Largely 'Watered Down' After High Hopes Originally hailed as a landmark piece of legislation that would help stop the global crisis of forest loss. But, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, previously heralded as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, leading to criticism from its initial author and environmental politicians. "The regulation was stripped," stated the law's original author, pointing to the exclusion of key obligations 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, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would complicate the task of authorities. Political Dismantling Green party MEP Marie Toussaint was more blunt, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law. This outcome stands in stark contrast to the hopes of over 1.2 million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of deforestation-linked products. When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the most ambitious legislation proposed to fight forest loss." A Story of Dilution The regulation's dilution has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. The proposal encountered significant delays, ostensibly over technical problems, which sparked criticism. "By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP. Originally, the regulation mandated that firms to trace goods to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, 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 said. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks." Mounting Pressure However, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in Brussels from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and EU logging states. Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority more skeptical of environmental rules. "The other pressure has come from major export markets outside the EU," said corporate sustainability professor, implying the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks. The Weakened Final Text The passed law features key dilutions: Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks. A new “low risk” category was introduced. A option for more reductions was opened for next spring. Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring. "Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it stripped them back," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms." Uncertainty for Companies The delays and changes have also created annoyance 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 major letdown." The Commission's Stance A commission spokesperson supported the final law, stating: "We have listened to feedback and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application." "The new text ensures stability, which is key for business and competent authorities to effectively enforce this vitally important law."