- In 2023, the European Parliament passed a sweeping law meant to curb the import of goods and products linked to deforestation.
- After right-wing parties won the 2024 EU elections, the law, called the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), was weakened and postponed.
- Late last year, the European Parliament postponed the EUDR’s implementation for a second time.
- Mongabay spoke to German MEP Delara Burkhardt, the lead EUDR negotiator for the Socialists and Democrats Group, at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France.
In 2023, when the European Parliament passed a law meant to keep products linked to deforestation out of the EU single market, environmentalists were riding high. The landmark piece of legislation, called the European Union Deforestation-free Regulation, or EUDR, had won the support of an overwhelming majority of lawmakers as part of the EU’s Green Deal. Opposition from commodity-producing countries like Brazil and Malaysia hadn’t derailed the law, which looked like it would promptly cruise into force.
And then the winds changed.
The 2024 EU elections sent parliament into a sharp rightward turn, partly caused by a “greenlash” against the cost of bold environmental and climate policies. Afterward, the new parliament amended the EUDR to weaken its requirements and decided to delay its implementation for a year, with a spokesperson for the ascendant center-right voting bloc calling it a “bureaucratic monster.”
Late last year, the law was delayed for a second time — raising concerns over whether it will now be implemented at all.
To get a better understanding of the politics behind the repeated delays and what they say about the EU’s environmental agenda, Mongabay’s Ashoka Mukpo caught up with Germany’s Delara Burkhardt at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France. One of the youngest members of parliament, Burkhardt has been the lead negotiator on the EUDR for the Socialists and Democrats Group.
The following interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
Mongabay: I wanted to start by asking you: what is the EUDR and why is it important?
Delara Burkhardt: Every minute we lose 100 trees. It’s an incredible amount, and we lose them because of the way we consume products. Forests are being clear-cut because we import products like cocoa, coffee, palm oil, rubber — you can add to that list.
The EUDR looks at the European responsibility in this consumption. We know that forests are being clear-cut for our products, and we want to make European companies accountable to trace back where their products come from so that our supply chains become deforestation-free.
Mongabay: There have now been two straight delays in its implementation. What’s happening?
Delara Burkhardt: One has to be very clear: the delays are not technical issues. It’s not about implementation. It’s a political decision.
We see a lot of pressure, especially coming from within the EU, from some industries and from the forest industry itself, saying they are not ready to fulfill their responsibilities under the EUDR.
When you look more closely, those who are now pushing for the postponements are the same actors who were always very critical about the EUDR in the first place.
What we see is that those who want to preserve the status quo have taken power. Companies that already invested in making themselves EUDR-compliant are now [being sidelined].
This is a problem because it lowers ambition in the EU’s climate responsibility. We are following the weakest [companies] — those who are not ready to take up their responsibilities — rather than the ones that want to make a difference.
Mongabay: Are there particular industries or countries that have been more active in opposing the EUDR?
Delara Burkhardt: The main opponents come from industries that claim they have more difficulties implementing the regulation. We see it, for example, in the palm oil and rubber sectors.
There are also countries of origin that have been critical. We saw pressure from the U.S. There were also countries in Southeast Asia that were critical. Malaysia and Indonesia, for example.
Mongabay: What is the basis for the United States’ opposition?
Delara Burkhardt: It’s about soy, beef and timber products, such as wood pellets for which the U.S. is an important exporter to the EU.
More generally, the criticism is about us making demands or setting standards on products that enter the European market. That is the basic criticism we hear from the U.S.
Mongabay: Some of the big chocolate companies seem to be supportive of the EUDR. Why is that?
Delara Burkhardt: What I have observed is that product streams which are more closely connected to the consumer are more supportive of the EUDR. Cocoa is one example. There was already a bad image in that sector because of child labor and environmental destruction.
So I saw a lot of push from parts of the chocolate industry to deliver a more transparent supply chain. They were also positive about having a regulation for this because it gives a level playing field.
If everyone has to apply sustainability rules, then it adds value [to their product] and it becomes easier to implement. It makes the whole supply chain more transparent.
Especially in the cocoa sector, we have very tiny structures throughout the supply chains. We have a lot of smallholder farmers. To actually be accountable requires everyone in the supply chain to work together.
That is why I think there was special awareness in the chocolate industry, along with a lot of support for the EUDR coming from the biggest actors to the smaller ones.
Mongabay: What are the costs and consequences of these delays?
Delara Burkhardt: We risk putting the whole legislation into the trash bin.
With this insecurity, [companies] can never be sure whether the EUDR will be implemented or not, so they hesitate — because compliance requires investment. You have to know what’s happening in your supply chain and be able to trace commodities back to the plot of land. This requires digital tools and investments in infrastructure.
Nobody will do that if the law is always being postponed. We are in a limbo.
Everyone who already invested in EUDR implementation now feels the insecurity most. The risk is that those who want to play by the rules are the ones who end up disadvantaged.
Mongabay: It felt like the EUDR was a done deal, and suddenly everything got shaken up. Were you surprised by the pushback?
Delara Burkhardt: What surprised me was the enormity and the recklessness of this new approach of postponing environmental legislation — always waiting until the last second, even while a lot of companies had already made the investments to deliver on it. That surprised me and made me mad.
We do not have time. Every tree we lose, every second we lose, means we are losing more forests — more lungs of the planet.
And this is not only a climate problem. It’s also about the livelihood of people. Forest cutting often comes with breaches of land tenure rights. So it’s not only an ecological crisis we are seeing, it’s a social crisis. And it has to stop.
Mongabay: What do those opposing the EUDR gain from this last-minute strategy?
Delara Burkhardt: You undermine the whole democratic procedure.
When we [debated and passed] the EUDR, it was a constructive and deliberative democratic process. We looked at the different commodities. We heard industry interests. We heard from producers and land interests. We considered how to tackle the problem of EU-imported deforestation in the best way.
By choosing a last-minute postponement approach, you don’t need to prove you are taking responsibility. You cannot have a deliberative process where you discuss what the best instruments are. You simply use your power to postpone something without really giving an argument and without having an authentic debate on the consequences of the delay.
That is enormously dangerous for democratic procedures.
We are talking about a law that was supported by a vast majority in the European Parliament and by a vast majority of member states — and now it is not applied because it does not fit the interests of a few.
Mongabay: Where is this pressure coming from?
Delara Burkhardt: Here in Europe, much of the pressure comes from farmers and the forest industry.
Before the EUDR, we already had the Timber Regulation. That regulation already made it a responsibility for wood producers to make their supply chains transparent. In fact, they were among the best prepared.
One of the main issues raised was the requirement to deliver the geolocation data of the plot of land where products are sourced. It was said to be extremely difficult and an overwhelming bureaucratic burden.
But every taxpayer has to know where their money comes from. If you want to sell your product, why shouldn’t you know which area you are sourcing it from?
If you produce and you clear-cut forests, you should be held accountable. I will never accept that you can clear land and not be responsible for it.
Of course, the problem within the European Union is not as large as in some [non-EU] producing countries. We don’t have deforestation in Austria in the same way [as in other non-EU countries]. But we still have deforestation within the EU.
And if we want to keep the EU internal market functioning, we must have a rule that applies to all. Trade rules do not allow us to differentiate between market actors. We need a rule that applies equally in order to ensure a level playing field.
That is what we want to achieve with the EUDR. Working against deforestation in supply chains should not be an act of goodwill — it should be a necessity if you want to bring your products to sale in European markets.
Mongabay: Over the last decade, the EU has been in the vanguard of environmental policymaking globally — setting standards through the European Green Deal and other initiatives. Now it feels like things are getting shaky. What has happened in the last two years?
Delara Burkhardt: It is not a lack of urgency among citizens. The climate crisis is hitting Europe harder now, especially in Southern Europe, where we see forest fires and floods.
What has changed is the overlap of crises. The economic situation and geopolitical tensions have created an opportunity for those who never wanted ambitious environmental laws to postpone them.
They say we now have bigger struggles to fight. I do not see anything bigger than the climate crisis.
This is a window of opportunity being used — fear among people, economic insecurity, geopolitical crisis — to push against things that some actors never wanted in the first place.
Mongabay: How do they respond to your arguments about the climate crisis and its impact on the EU?
Delara Burkhardt: I think the right [wing] in this house, and also worldwide, has decided that environmental laws are the new cultural fight. Working against environmental legislation has become a cultural war.
Environmentalism and economic growth are being set against each other.
Mongabay: Should we be worried about the regulation at this point?
Delara Burkhardt: Yes, we should be worried. The limbo of postponement risks the EUDR never entering into force.
Which company will invest in supply chain transparency if they do not know whether it will pay off? Some companies have already spent millions on EUDR implementation. Those investments are at risk if postponement continues.
I will not stop fighting to ensure it enters into force, because I see it as a big opportunity — for farmers to have a secure future, for forests not to be clear-cut, and for producing countries not to have their nature protection laws undermined by European demand.
Right now, we have an agricultural system that [relies on] mass production and does not sufficiently look at quality of production and standards — how farmers work with the ground and with the infrastructure they have.
We need a major shift toward more sustainable agricultural practices. It is a big fight because there are huge industries involved. There is often a romanticized picture of [agriculture] that it is small farmers working their land, but what is really happening is the agro-industry engaging in mass production without any sustainability criteria.
The laws and their implementation need to target those with the biggest responsibility and actually [get them to] change practices.
Mongabay: Do you get disheartened when you see all this pushback: anti-climate, anti-environmental policymaking?
Delara Burkhardt: Of course it is frustrating. But it is not my job to be frustrated.
We have to make sure that even if it is not fashionable right now to be climate-aware, we still deal with this crisis. We have to navigate a right-wing majority and, on the one hand, protect the laws we already have, and on the other hand open windows of opportunity to do more — because the Green Deal and everything we have is not enough.
We have to deliver more. When we do not act, the crisis hits hardest those who do not have the financial means or possibilities to protect themselves from its effects. Every little step helps. We cannot give up. If we give up, those who always wanted everything to remain as it is — they win.
That is what fuels me. It is going to be a long slog.
Banner image: MEP Delara Burkhardt at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France. Image by Juan Maza for Mongabay.
Credits
