EUDR: Time to Get SeriousBY PIETRO PAGANINI
- 3 June 2025
- Posted by: Competere
- Categories: highlights, News, Sustainable Oils & Fats
Adoption, revision, postponement, or withdrawal? The EUDR is back in the spotlight. Initially presented as a turning point in the global fight against deforestation, it is now turning into an uncertain and never-ending regulatory saga. The intentions were ambitious: to make European supply chains deforestation-free, promote traceability, and foster environmental responsibility. A few months before it is set to take effect, the prevailing feeling among businesses, governments, and stakeholders is clear: uncertainty. The EU must make a decision.
In recent days, a series of developments has raised doubts about the EUDR’s actual ability to enter with strength in an effective and unified way.
EARLY COUNTRY CLASSIFICATION: CLARITY OR CHAOS?
Unexpectedly, the European Commission released the country benchmarking, ranking them from “low” to “high” deforestation risk, almost a month early. However, instead of clarifying things, this move has caused significant frustration among countries labeled as “standard”. The criteria? Weak. The decisions? Suspiciously political.
NEW PRESSURE FOR A POSTPONEMENT
Prompted by the United States and European business groups, some members of the European Parliament are again calling for a postponement, proposing (for the second time) the introduction of a “zero risk” category, more accessible rules for SMEs, and the recognition of existing certifications.
AGRIFISH: CLASH BETWEEN MEMBER STATES AND THE COMMISSION
During the latest AGRIFISH Council meeting, several ministers, led by Luxembourg and Austria, called for simplifying the regulation. Commissioner Roswall defended the current approach. But is this a genuine conviction or merely a political appearance? There’s lingering doubt that Commission President von der Leyen and her chief of staff may soon intervene behind the scenes.
MEANWHILE…
The latest version of the FAQ has left stakeholders more confused than before. The result? Immediate demands for a more precise and more concrete revision.
Moreover, it is evident that many national competent authorities are unprepared. Some Member States, including Italy, have yet to adopt the regulation formally.
IS IT REALLY WORTH CONTINUING LIKE THIS?
Each postponement undermines trust in the European system, both domestically and internationally. The EUDR risks being seen as a bureaucratic exercise rather than a genuine commitment to sustainability.
Many companies have already invested in traceability and reorganized their supply chains. Some sectors, like palm oil, have become benchmarks for control and transparency across the entire supply chain.
Protecting forests is a shared goal, and we all agree on that. But the implementation of the regulation – amid chaotic texts, ambiguous FAQs, and excessive complexity – risks harming the very actors who should be actively involved in the transition. It’s a missed opportunity. And yes, the Commission should take responsibility for failing to propose a simpler, more effective, and clearer tool.
A PRAGMATIC PROPOSAL
There is a way out of this deadlock, and ironically, it’s simple: POSTPONE THE SANCTIONS, giving companies time to adapt and involving all stakeholders. Only in this way can we turn a good idea into real impact.
Otherwise, the risk is that the regulation will be abandoned, admitting the failure of six years of work. Remaining in oblivion serves no one. It fuels illusions, increases costs, and weakens Europe’s credibility.