EU Parliament Scraps Deforestation Country Risk Rankings, Casting Doubt on EUDR

July 11, 2025

11:24 am

Key Impact Points:

Lawmakers vote to scrap the EUDR’s country benchmarking system over concerns of flawed data and oversimplified categories
The decision may delay implementation of the landmark deforestation regulation beyond the current 2025–2026 timeline
Environmental groups warn the move undermines EU climate goals and forest protection efforts globally

EU Lawmakers Vote Down Country Risk Classification in EUDR

The European Parliament has voted to reject the EU Deforestation Regulation’s (EUDR) benchmarking system that categorizes countries by deforestation risk, dealing a significant setback to the bloc’s effort to eliminate deforestation-linked products from EU supply chains.

The EUDR, introduced in 2021, requires companies to conduct strict due diligence on products such as palm oil, beef, timber, cocoa, soy, and rubber—tracing them back to the land of origin and proving they are not linked to deforestation post-2020.

A key feature of the law was a risk-tier system designed to ease or tighten compliance depending on a country’s deforestation profile—low, standard, or high.

EPP Leads Rejection of Risk Ratings

Led by the European People’s Party (EPP), the motion challenged the benchmarking system, citing outdated and incomplete data. Lawmakers said the tool “does not accurately reflect the current realities in the countries concerned,” and “fails to consider key real-world factors, most notably current land-use dynamics and forest degradation.”

They also argued that the three-tier system was too blunt an instrument. The EPP had previously pushed for the creation of a fourth “no-risk” category during negotiations—an idea left out of the final agreement with the European Council.

Alexander Bernhuber, MEP for the EPP, stated:

“The Commission’s list misrepresents the situation in many countries and creates unnecessary burdens for farmers, foresters, and industry. The EPP Group remains committed to responsible forest stewardship and to policies that combine environmental protection with workable solutions for those who care for and rely on forests. Therefore, a new ‘no risk’ category must be introduced for countries with stable or expanding forest areas. This is how we make EU rules more fair and effective.”

Delays Loom as Environmental Groups Sound Alarm

The rejection raises the possibility of further delays to the EUDR’s implementation—already postponed to December 2025 for large companies and June 2026 for smaller ones.

The European Commission had supported the delay, citing uneven readiness among global partners and EU stakeholders.

Environmental advocates criticized the move, warning it could stall enforcement. Greenpeace noted that developing a new classification methodology in time is unlikely.

Greenpeace Forests Campaigner Sigrid Deters said:

“We are aware that the Commission’s regulation has shortcomings, but the Commission has committed to review it in 2026. In the meantime, the EUDR must be applied by operators and enforced by competent authorities, according to the agreed schedule.”

What’s Next

Without a viable replacement for the rejected system, the EUDR faces increased regulatory uncertainty. A delay in execution could weaken the EU’s credibility on global environmental leadership—particularly in forest conservation and sustainable trade.