You're browsing our English site, so by default we are only showing content in English. If you'd prefer to view all available content regardless of language, please change this switch.
You're browsing our English site, so by default we are only showing content in English. If you'd prefer to view all available content regardless of language, please change this switch.
“Amendments to EUDR could harm EU efforts to block Russian and Belarusian ‘conflict timber’”
In mid-2022, in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the EU imposed sanctions on wood products from Russia and Belarus. These sanctions reflect the importance of the forestry sector to the Russian and Belarusian economies, and that the Russian military profits directly from timber sales. Russia’s timber business is also connected to oligarchs with close ties to the Kremlin – including some sanctioned by the EU.
In January 2025, our Blood-stained birch investigation revealed that the EU had imported more than €1.5 billion of illegal Russian and Belarusian birch plywood since these sanctions took effect…
Imports of conflict ply have continued since Earthsight’s last calculations, which were based on data until October 2024. New analysis shows that in the six months from November 2024 to April 2025, the EU has imported a further €273 million worth…
Earthsight’s analysis, based on in-depth investigations into the illegal wood trade, shows that if the European Commission were to introduce a ‘no-risk’ category into the law, it would not only open the EU to more illegal timber, it would also hinder the implementation of EU sanctions on Russian and Belarusian wood…
The EU Parliament and Council reached a provisional agreement to postpone and amend the EU Deforestation Regulation and mandating an early 2026 review of the law’s 'administrative impact' even before it will come into force.
"A one-year delay is likely to cause the emission of 16.8 million tonnes of CO2, an amount that would require more than twice the number of trees in Belgium to absorb", the statement says.
The European Parliament, with support from conservatives and far-right groups, voted to delay the EUDR’s implementation by another year, despite opposition from civil society and major food companies.
EU member states have agreed on their negotiating position on proposed changes to the deforestation law, seeking a one-year delay and additional changes to the provisions of the EU Deforestation Regulation.
EU countries remain deadlocked over proposed changes to the bloc’s deforestation rules, with divisions over delaying implementation and adding a review clause.
The European Commission published a proposal to only delay the EU anti-deforestation regulation by one year for small companies, while keeping the original 31 December 2025 start date for all other companies.
Ahead of COP 30, around 30 global investors managing $3 trillion in assets have urged countries to stop deforestations and emphasised the need for policies that deliver legal, regulatory, and financial certainty to help protect the forests and safeguard economic stability.
"We deeply regret that a technical IT issue risks jeopardising the EUDR’s core objectives and entry into force, three months before the implementation deadline for companies," the undersigning companies and organisations write.
There is widespread frustration with the EU Commission’s decision to delay the implementation of the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) for the second time in a year, due to 'IT issues'.
Companies and trade associations urge EU policymakers to uphold the Deforestation Regulation’s ambition and timeline, warning that reopening the legislative process would create damaging uncertainty, delay climate action, and penalise responsible businesses.
Eleven EU member states—including Austria, Luxembourg, Italy, Finland, and others – have asked the European Commission to further delay and soften the EU’s deforestation-free products law.
The EU has eased reporting requirements under its anti-deforestation law by allowing companies to submit annual due diligence statements instead of for each shipment, prompting criticism from campaigners who warn it could weaken enforcement.
Finnish companies face varying levels of preparedness for EU sustainability regulations, with a key challenge including regulatory uncertainty created by the EU, a new study finds.
The EU Parliament approved a one-year delay for companies to comply with the deforestation regulation, now set to apply from December 2025 for large operators and June 2026 for small businesses.
The new guide by Forest Peoples Programme outlines how indigenous and forest peoples can use the EU Deforestation Regulation and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive to address corporate-linked human rights violations and environmental harm.
The EU Parliament has sent the EUDR back to the committee for interinstitutional trilogue negotiations to grant companies an additional year for implementation.
Nestlé, Ferrero, Unilever and Mars have joined calls by other food and drink manufacturers in opposing the European Union’s delay to deforestation laws.
The Cocoa Coalition, comprising companies and civil society organizations, supports the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) and urges swift adoption of the delayed implementation without reopening negotiations, while also calling for support to smallholder farmers for compliance.
Friends of the Earth Europe and 225 organizations urge the EU to reject a proposal delaying the EU Deforestation Regulation, emphasising its importance in combating deforestation and supporting human rights.
The EU's anti-deforestation regulation faces criticism for potentially allowing major deforestation contributors to avoid being classified as "high risk," which could weaken the regulation's effectiveness.
The article argues that the EU's anti-deforestation law should prioritize input from frontline communities, as governments in Malaysia and Indonesia are undermining Indigenous rights and providing unreliable forest data.
New analysis by Earthsight reveals European consumers have been buying beef and leather from firms linked to illegalities in the Brazilian Amazon uncovered by the Environmental Investigation Agency. According to Earthsight this serves as a reminder that without the EU Deforestation Regulation, European consumption will continue to drive deforestation and rights abuses overseas.
The companies consider it important that the European Union adopts a robust law that minimises the risk of conversion and degradation of natural ecosystems (alongside deforestation and the degradation of natural forests) as well as human rights violations, associated with commodities and products placed on the EU market.
A delegation of indigenous, human rights, and environmental organisations published a statement urging the European Commission to include independent civil society groups in ongoing key talks with Malaysia and Indonesia over its anti-deforestation rules.
Companies – and the EU Competent Authorities that have the responsibility of implementing the law - now have 18 months to prepare before the law comes into action, at the end of 2024.
EU legislators reached political agreement in the early hours of Tuesday, 6 December, to pass a new law to ensure products on the EU market are not linked to the destruction or degradation of forests. WWF and Greenpeace welcome the law as breakthrough but also point to some of its weaknesses.
While the law is a historic first, it fails to include strong provisions to protect the land rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, who time and time again have proven to be the best guardians of the forests, says NGO Fern.
Negotiations between the Commission, Parliament and Council are set to finalise next week. One crucial provision of the draft law currently being targeted by certain EU member states, is the protection of the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities.
A delegation of MEPs will now take the Parliament's position to negotiations with the EU Member States, who agreed a range of changes in the EU Council in June to weaken key elements of the proposed law.
Measures would oblige banks to conduct due diligence to prevent the financing of deforestation, boost protections for indigenous communities, and add rubber and leather to the list of imported products that would be screened for deforestation links.
The Council adopted its negotiating position (general approach) on a proposal to limit the consumption of products contributing to deforestation or forest degradation.
Almost all plantations linked to deforestation are currently owned by just three multinational companies, which together have made deals worth billions of euros with European banks.
Indonesian civil society groups call for the EU proposal to be strengthened by including SMEs, a complaint mechanism, and by considering the impact on small holders, indigenous groups and communities
Lessons from the implementation of the EU Timber Regulation show that Member States’ Competent Authorities often fail to meaningfully implement and enforce the law in practice, argues Earthsight
Some EU member states want more time to implement the upcoming anti-deforestation law, which includes due-diligence obligations, citing concerns about the administrative burden that SMEs might face.
The undersigned organisations, welcome the European Commission’s proposal for a new EU regulation on deforestation-free products. It is now up to the European Parliament and Member States to preserve and improve the essential elements of the Commission’s proposal and deliver a strong and ambitious law.
Civil society organisations and representatives of Indigenous communities all over the world call on the EU to require businesses to respect land rights in anti-deforestation rules
Cameroonian activists rallied in front of the EU delegation in Yaoundé to demand the block to cease support for rubber linked to deforestation, and to call for an ambitious EU legislation on forest commodities
The fate of the proposals on (i) minimising the risk of deforestation and forest degradation associated with products placed on the EU market and (ii) sustainable corporate governance is now unclear, raising concerns among civil society.
The organisations call on the EU to ensure that its upcoming legislative measures are effective and fully uphold their rights as set out in international law, and in line with the EU’s own commitments.
