🔗 Share this article EU Anti-Deforestation Regulation Largely 'Dismantled' Despite Initial Fanfare It was a landmark piece of legislation that would help stop the global crisis of forest loss. However, the final version of the European Union's deforestation regulation, previously heralded as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its initial author and green lawmakers. "It has been hollowed out," said the law's original author, citing the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to check the origin of products like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee. He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and less precise origin data would complicate the task of authorities. A Watered-Down Law Green party vice-president a leading green politician was more blunt, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law. This final text stands in stark contrast to the demands of more than a million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a ban on deforestation-linked products. At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the most ambitious legislation ever put forward to fight forest loss." From Ambition to Compromise The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced significant delays, reportedly over technical problems, which drew condemnation. "By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented the Green MEP. Originally, the regulation required companies to trace commodities to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and large financial penalties. "It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally explained. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks." Intense Lobbying Yet, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in Brussels from multinational corporations, producer countries, conservative political groups and EU logging states. Experts cite last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, creating a new political majority less favorable toward environmental rules. "Additional intense pressure came from major export markets like the United States," noted corporate sustainability professor, 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 mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks. A new exemption for small operators was created. A option for more reductions was established for next spring. Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny. "Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," lamented Schally. "Moving obligations upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms." Business Frustration The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance. "It is very frustrating because we put a lot of effort into preparing," stated Xavier Rombouts. "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, saying: "The commission has responded to feedback and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation." "The new text provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to successfully implement this very important law."