The European Union’s ambitious plan to ban imports of products linked to deforestation from January 2024 is facing growing resistance. Despite calls to delay the implementation of the EU Deforestation Regulation from several governments, trading partners, and conservative members of the European Parliament (MEPs), the European Commission insists that it remains committed to the ban.
The regulation, which aims to combat deforestation by targeting goods like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, and palm oil, has sparked concerns among suppliers. Critics argue that the regulation places an excessive burden on businesses, potentially driving them out of business and causing shortages and price increases in EU countries.
Several key players have publicly called for a postponement. The US and Brazil, both significant exporters to the EU, have urged the Commission to delay the implementation. Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz even lobbied European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to postpone the law.
The center-right European People’s Party (EPP), von der Leyen’s political home, has been a vocal advocate for delaying the ban, claiming to have the backing of 20 EU member states. The issue reached a critical point last week when the EPP chair of the parliamentary agriculture committee reportedly received assurances from von der Leyen that a delay was being considered.
While the Commission spokesperson has not confirmed any postponement, they have stated that the EU executive has not yet proposed any changes to the Deforestation Regulation.
MEP Peter Liese, the EPP’s environment policy coordinator, argues that a postponement is essential to allow the EU and its trading partners time to prepare for the new legislation. He highlights that even countries like Brazil, under its new government, struggle to implement the necessary changes to comply with the regulation.
Liese dismisses concerns that postponing or revising recently adopted environmental laws could undermine the EU’s Green Deal, which aims to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. He asserts that it is better to delay a well-designed deforestation regulation than to hastily implement a flawed one, emphasizing the importance of ensuring the Green Deal’s credibility.
