MEP Asger Christensen (Renew), along with colleagues Benoit Cassart and Katri Kulmuni, has submitted a parliamentary question challenging the European Commission on the proportionality of the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) in light of its own cited scientific evidence. The MEPs argue that the Commission's simplification review, published on 4 May 2026, selectively uses a study by Singh and Persson to justify the current commodity scope, while the study's detailed findings show significant variation in deforestation footprints among commodities. Staple crops like maize, rice, and cassava, which are excluded from the EUDR, collectively account for about 11% of global deforestation, far exceeding cocoa (2%), coffee (1%), and rubber (1%). The question seeks to ensure the regulation remains risk-based and proportionate.
The parliamentary question, dated 19 June 2026, targets three specific areas: the divergence between the study's commodity-level data and the EUDR's scope; how the Commission will incorporate the full findings into future scoping and benchmarking; and what safeguards will be applied to maintain a focus on high-risk commodities. The MEPs, from the Renew Europe group, are pushing for a more evidence-based approach that balances environmental ambition with competitiveness and supply chain resilience.
the Commission must explain its assessment of the scope divergence, outline plans for integrating the study's findings, and detail safeguards for proportionality. This is a direct challenge to the Commission's narrative that the seven EUDR commodities are responsible for 70% of agriculture-driven deforestation, as the study reveals a more nuanced picture.
The Commission is expected to respond within approximately six weeks. The answer will signal whether the Commission is open to adjusting the EUDR's scope or benchmarking criteria based on new scientific evidence, which could have significant implications for producers of staple crops and the broader agricultural sector.