Many operators were not prepared for the EUDR. However, many were and criticised the delay
(Image: Getty)
A 12-month delay to EUDR came at the right time as many companies, despite being convinced they were ready, hadn’t correctly prepared.
That’s according to Arsira Thumaprudti, EUDR expert at crop sustainability intelligence firm Agritask.
“There are companies who we spoke to six months ago who were ready,” she says. “But we also encountered a few companies that weren’t ready as we came closer to the original deadline.”
The deforestation preventing regulation has been the centre of both praise and backlash, with environmental groups urging its enforcement and some businesses calling for a delay, since the start of 2024.
Its original deadline was the end of this month for largescale business and the end of June 2025 for SMEs. Both have been pushed back 12 months following weeks of debate and votes from the European Parliament, Commission and other involved parties.
The gift of EUDR time after 12 month delay
Businesses had been given the gift of time to either get things in order or make certain the correct processes were already in place, says Thumaprudti.
Also read → EUDR ‘no risk’ status cancelled and 12 month delay reconfirmed
“By the time Q4 came, there were businesses that needed to map their supply chain and understand their suppliers.”
Supply chain mapping had been a sticking point for most businesses throughout the process, though not always a problem caused by the end business.
“Typically, the suppliers can sometimes be hesitant about giving over information,” Thumaprudti explains. “You don’t want to give all your supplier information away and where you source from, that’s the heart of your business and I understand.”
However, suppliers could provide enough detail – such as processes and descriptions of processes – to help their clients build a better picture of an overall supply chain.
“Due diligence doesn’t need to be public, it can be when the transactions happen,” she continues. “But working with suppliers on what they’re planning and what they’re looking for can go a long way.”
A more sustainable food and drink industry
With the delay, it was now a good time for companies to complete dry runs and check the relevant data is in place, she urges.
Communication in the food sector, however, was generally not the best for dealing with EUDR, she believes. “There’s a lot of burden on the people on the ground, in the fields and at the start of the process,” Thumaprudti believes.
“Food and beverage companies need to share some of the benefits they have from being at the top, maybe by incentivising their suppliers or even their growers to build the support they need into their systems.”
But businesses shouldn’t stop at the deforestation element of the regulation, she urges. EUDR has given businesses the opportunity to more easily understand and measure various parts of their supply chains to the benefit of the planet and people as a whole.
“Some of our clients also look at other commodities, like vanilla or putting in place processes to enhance the traceability of all parts of their supply chains in all countries – not just commodities like palm oil and in Europe.”
