By the end of 2025, the European Union Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) will take effect, mandating geographic traceability for imported products to curb deforestation. However, without tangible support for non-EU exporting countries, the risk remains that this ambitious regulation will be more of a policy statement than a practical solution.
Anti-Deforestation, on the fight against deforestation the European Union is choosing to wait—but the cost of lost time could be steep. The implementation of the European Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), set to replace the existing European Timber Regulation (EUTR), has been pushed back. Yet, this delay isn’t about giving lagging stakeholders time to catch up or offering relief to those who have just met compliance. Instead, it reflects the complexity of sustainability: economic concerns for major industrial players, technological and operational challenges for EU member states, and far-reaching ecological consequences—particularly for countries in the Global South.
TAKEAWAYS
Anti-Deforestation: Europe Hits a Standstill
To fully grasp the scale of the challenge—amid missteps and hesitant progress—it’s essential to take a step back and clarify the broader context, definitions, and underlying dynamics.
At first glance, the European Union’s EUDR (European Deforestation Regulation) might seem like a concern only for environmentalists and forest protection groups. But a closer look at its objectives and far-reaching implications reveals that this legislation extends well beyond conservation efforts, impacting nearly every major sector of the European economy.
From an economic standpoint, the requirement to rigorously trace and verify the origins of any material derived from wood—or linked to it, such as paper and related products—has profound consequences for numerous European industries reliant on these raw materials. Key sectors like furniture and interior design, construction, packaging, and chemicals all depend heavily on wood-based inputs. Even trade and logistics, which rely on paper and cardboard for packaging and shipping, will feel the effects of the new regulations.
Geopolitically, Europe’s push to combat global deforestation will primarily affect developing nations in Asia, South America, and Africa—regions that hold the bulk of the world’s forest resources. While many of these countries are eager to preserve their forests, they often lack the infrastructure, technical expertise, or economic leverage to enforce sustainable practices effectively. Without adequate support, the EU’s well-intentioned policy risks placing an uneven burden on nations already grappling with economic and environmental vulnerabilities.
EUTR vs. EUDR: From Paper Trails to Geolocation
At first glance, the acronyms EUTR and EUDR may seem similar, but their approach and impact-especially for those responsible for compliance-are markedly different.
The EUTR (European Timber Regulation), adopted in 2010 and enforced since 2013, focuses exclusively on the trade of timber and its derivatives, including paper. It prohibits the sale of products sourced from illegal logging within the EU, requiring companies to implement internal due diligence processes based primarily on documentary verification.
While the legislation clearly defines compliance requirements and outlines the frequency and nature of checks by member states, its enforcement has remained largely administrative, leaving ample room for loopholes and circumvention.
Key Aspects of the EUTR:
- The first buyer (the entity placing the product on the EU market) must conduct rigorous due diligence to verify legality.
- Subsequent operators along the supply chain must maintain records to ensure product traceability.
The EUDR (European Deforestation Regulation), which was put on hold last September just before its scheduled implementation, is both more ambitious in its goals and more stringent in its enforcement mechanisms.
Unlike the EUTR, the EUDR integrates a technological layer into due diligence, requiring companies to provide precise geolocation data for every forest area where wood or fiber destined for the European market is harvested. The goal is to establish absolute traceability, preventing products linked to deforestation-illegal or otherwise-from entering the EU supply chain.
Companies failing to comply face exclusion from the European market and could incur severe penalties, with fines of up to at least 4% of total annual EU sales revenue from the previous year.
Implementation Dynamics: A Complex Transition
As it stands, medium and large enterprises have approximately nine months to comply with the EUDR requirements, while micro and small businesses have been granted an additional six months, pushing their deadline to June 30, 2026.
In late 2024, when the European Union decided to delay the regulation’s enforcement, it introduced an interim measure: an online due diligence registry designed to help businesses manage supply chains more efficiently. While this tool may be of limited value for companies with short and straightforward supply chains, it could prove strategic for those operating complex, multi-tiered networks, mitigating some of the operational burdens imposed by the new rules.
The EUDR has sparked divergent reactions. Some analysts see it as more of a moral suasion tool than an enforceable regulation, arguing that many countries simply lack the capacity to implement the necessary controls and technology in the short term. Others warn that the regulation risks deepening global inequalities, widening the gap between countries with the means to comply and those struggling with systemic challenges.
For many nations, introducing advanced forest protection standards while they still struggle to enforce even the most basic environmental regulations could further exacerbate their difficulties. The barriers to compliance are significant:
- Financial resources to invest in monitoring and enforcement
- Trained personnel with the necessary expertise
- Sophisticated technological infrastructure
- Reliable, constantly updated data
These conditions are far from universal, and without targeted support, the EUDR could unintentionally leave behind the very nations it aims to engage, reinforcing structural disparities rather than reducing them.
EUDR Puts EU Candidate Countries to the Test
To fully grasp the challenges posed by Europe’s new anti-deforestation regulations, it’s essential to examine the situation in the so-called “enlargement countries”—nations aspiring to join the European Union. Nowhere are the tensions between Europe’s regulatory ambitions and the actual capacities of these candidate states more evident.
North Macedonia: A Case in Point
North Macedonia, a candidate for EU membership since 2005 and officially in negotiations since 2022, is a prime example. While the country has formally begun aligning with EU regulations, including the EUDR (European Deforestation Regulation), its ability to implement the new rules remains an open question.
“The fact that we’ve officially started preparations doesn’t necessarily mean we’ve truly assessed our readiness,” says Sasho Petrovski, president of the Regional Center for Forestry and Rural Development (REFORD).
“Are we really prepared for the concrete implementation of the EUDR?” he asks, urging broader public discussion.
Petrovski highlights an immediate and pressing issue: a shrinking regulatory workforce.
“Instead of strengthening the agency responsible for overseeing the forestry sector, we’ve actually reduced staff from 20 to just 12 experts. On top of that, we still haven’t clearly designated the authority responsible for EUDR enforcement—an entity that should ideally have strong experience in the field.”
Beyond enforcement, regulatory alignment remains a major hurdle. North Macedonia must adapt its legal framework to meet EUDR’s stringent requirements, including the mandatory use of advanced geolocation and traceability systems. This transition will demand significant investments in:
- Technical training for compliance inspectors
- State-of-the-art tracking technology
- Ongoing updates for both regulators and businesses
For local small businesses, digitization poses an especially tough challenge. Many will struggle to integrate the necessary technologies, which could put them at a competitive disadvantage.
Despite these obstacles, North Macedonia recognizes the economic, environmental, and social opportunities that EUDR compliance could unlock. The benefits go beyond simple access to the EU single market—they include:
- Sustainable growth of the forestry sector
- Higher industry standards
- Job creation linked to compliance efforts
While North Macedonia may not be rich in forest resources compared to other Balkan nations, it can significantly improve the efficiency and management of its firewood supply chain—a key pillar of the national economy and its most significant export sector.
From an environmental perspective, the EUDR could serve as a catalyst for much-needed modernization, provided the country addresses its structural and technological deficits swiftly.
In this light, EU accession isn’t just a political milestone—it represents a strategic opportunity for sustainable development and innovation. For North Macedonia, embracing the EUDR isn’t merely about compliance—it’s a chance to make overdue reforms that could reshape its economy for the better.
Bosnia and Herzegovina: Where Environmental Challenges Collide with Institutional Fragmentation and Cultural Resistance
Among the Western Balkans’ EU candidate countries, Bosnia and Herzegovina stands out as one of the most complex cases. The country was officially granted EU candidate status in 2022, but its journey toward aligning environmental legislation with European standards has been ongoing since 2008—a process complicated by deep-rooted institutional fragmentation and a lack of a cohesive national vision for sustainable resource management.
One of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s most significant steps toward EU environmental alignment has been its participation in the Green Agenda for the Western Balkans, a regional platform designed to synchronize environmental policies with EU standards. On paper, this initiative provides a promising framework, a mosaic of best practices guiding the country toward sustainability.
However, moving from formal commitments to real implementation has proven challenging, largely due to the country’s intricate legal and administrative system.
“Our state’s legal framework is extremely complex and fragmented,” states an internal government analysis, “and this fragmentation affects all sectors, not just the environment.”
The challenge is not only administrative but also deeply cultural and social. Local civil society organizations point to entrenched resistance to environmental reform, compounded by corruption and irresponsibility—both from political leaders and certain foreign investors who exploit regulatory loopholes.
The reality on the ground is bleak, as voiced by Bosnian citizens themselves.
Sanja Milić, a freelance environmental journalist, observes:
“We’re not just facing political negligence at the top—we’re also seeing widespread public indifference. Forests are often treated as resources to be exploited quickly rather than ecosystems to be responsibly managed.”
The consequences of this institutional disarray and cultural resistance are stark: illegal logging, environmental degradation, and speculative land use continue unchecked, undermining efforts to modernize and enforce EU-aligned regulations.
Adding to the complexity is the economic weight of the forestry sector. Bosnia and Herzegovina is home to over 1,200 companies in the wood and furniture industry, many of which depend on exports to survive. For these businesses, compliance with EUTR (European Timber Regulation) was already difficult—adapting to the stricter EUDR (European Deforestation Regulation) presents an even greater challenge.
This transition is not just economic or technological—it is fundamentally cultural and organizational. Their ability to meet EUDR requirements will directly impact their future competitiveness in the European market.
How Bosnia and Herzegovina navigates this transition remains an open question, hinging on two key forces:
- The government, which has declared the timber supply chain a priority sector but faces scrutiny over transparency and enforcement.
- Civil society, which fears that the country’s weak regulatory enforcement will lead to ineffective environmental protections.
Despite government inertia, civil society organizations represent the strongest force for change. Local NGOs are not only mobilizing against environmental violations but also learning to collaborate, forming influential activist networks.
A key player is EkoBiH, an informal coalition of over 40 environmental organizations dedicated to biodiversity protection and sustainable forestry. Through advocacy campaigns and legal action, EkoBiH has become one of the few entities capable of holding the government accountable, providing citizens with a model for engagement and activism.
The coming months will reveal whether these grassroots efforts can overcome the deep-seated institutional and cultural resistance that has long stalled Bosnia and Herzegovina’s path toward sustainability—and Europe.
Albania: Where Forest Protection Collides with Corruption and Fragile Institutions
Albania formally began EU accession negotiations in 2022, but several critical chapters remain unresolved—none more pressing than environmental governance. In a country where forestry is not just an ecological issue but a deeply intertwined socioeconomic and governance challenge, adapting to European environmental regulations is proving particularly difficult.
“Forest management cannot be reduced to a simple environmental issue,” says Genci Rakipi, an Albanian expert on environmental governance. “It must be addressed as a deeply rooted socioeconomic and institutional challenge.”
Albania’s forestry sector is fraught with structural weaknesses that make compliance with EUTR (European Timber Regulation)—and the stricter EUDR (European Deforestation Regulation)—an uphill battle.
Beyond the depopulation of rural areas and the precarious economic conditions of local communities, the country’s ability to enforce sustainable forestry policies is severely hindered by fragile institutions and pervasive corruption.
Rakipi points to a telling example: the 2016 moratorium on illegal logging, which, instead of curbing deforestation, drove illicit activities deeper underground.
“That moratorium simply pushed illegal logging into more remote and less controllable areas, where operators have adopted even more aggressive and destructive harvesting techniques,” he explains.
While illegal loggers continue to operate unchecked, the true epicenter of the problem lies not in the forests, but in government offices.
“Corruption does not grow in the forests—it grows at the desks of public officials,” Rakipi observes.
Opaque permitting, fraudulent land registrations, and a lack of political will to enforce regulations have allowed illegal activities to thrive, making true sustainability reform an elusive goal.
Albania’s struggle with environmental governance is not just a regulatory challenge—it is a structural and cultural one.
Adapting to the EUTR and EUDR is not just about aligning laws with EU standards—it requires:
- Governance reforms to improve oversight and accountability
- Investment in training programs to equip officials and businesses with the skills needed for compliance
- Adoption of traceability technologies to track timber origins and prevent fraud
These measures demand financial resources and technical expertise—two areas where Albania still lags behind. But failure to act could have severe economic consequences: exclusion from the EU market, where Albania sends the majority of its timber exports.
Consider this: Italy alone absorbs over 50% of Albania’s wood exports, followed by Greece (15%) and Serbia (11%)[source: WITS].A failure to meet EUDR compliance standards could jeopardize these trade relationships and cripple a vital sector of the Albanian economy.
Despite these hurdles, Albania has an opportunity to turn its forestry crisis into a catalyst for sustainable development.
Two strategic solutions stand out:
- Ecotourism: Instead of relying on illegal logging, Albania could leverage its natural landscapes to build a sustainable tourism industry, generating new revenue streams that directly benefit local communities.
- Agroforestry: Integrating agriculture and forestry could provide alternative income sources while promoting biodiversity conservation and sustainable land use.
But for these models to succeed, a fundamental shift in Albania’s approach to forest management is needed.
Instead of a fragmented and opaque system, the country must embrace a model based on local empowerment—one that directly involves communities in conservation efforts and promotes sustainable land stewardship.
This transition will require political will, financial investment, and international support. But without it, Albania risks not only failing its environmental commitments—but also falling further behind on its path to European integration.
A bold shift toward transparent, community-driven forestry management may be ambitious—but it is essential. If Albania can rise to the challenge, it won’t just protect its forests—it will strengthen its economy, improve governance, and move one step closer to the EU.
This article was produced as part of the Thematic Networks of PULSE ( N-Ost | Balkan Insight ), a European initiative dedicated to fostering transnational journalistic collaborations.
