Release notes summary
This release is a broader methodology update focused on origin expansion, more accurate reference data, and more tailored risk scoring. Compared with v1.10, v1.11 reduces several unnecessarily strict data-quality classifications while introducing more detailed compliance assessments where better country- or context-specific information is available.
Key changes include:
New origins: Panama and China are added to the assessment framework, bringing the supported origin list to 47 countries.
Simpler deforestation logic: Commercial deforestation maps (DEF04) are now prioritised where available. Public-map assessment (DEF01) is used as the fallback rather than running both approaches in parallel.
More lenient farm-overlap thresholds: GEC01–GEC05 move the Medium, High, and Critical thresholds upward, reducing false-positive data-quality flags.
Country- and commodity-specific logic: Brazil receives more appropriate distance thresholds in GEC09, while GEP03 is no longer applied to soy datasets.
Improved geographic references: GER01 uses higher-accuracy national boundary data for Brazil and Uganda, while GER06 gives geopoints more tolerance around water-body boundaries.
More detailed IPLC assessment: LGL03 now distinguishes between unrecognised territories, local communities, and indigenous peoples instead of assigning the same Medium risk to every overlap.
Expanded protected-area context: LGL01 incorporates updated protected-area information and legal context for 17 countries, alongside a dedicated approach for Côte d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast).
Older behaviour remains available by running an older EUDR Test Profile version.
Change log
Test | Test-Version | Changes | Background |
Origin coverage | — | Added Panama and China to the assessment framework. | Expands Verify coverage across additional sourcing regions and supply chains. |
DEF01 | v1.04 | DEF01 is now skipped where commercial DEF04 maps are available. | Removes parallel public/commercial deforestation assessments and prioritises the higher-quality commercial map where supported. |
DEF02 | v1.03 | Farmer-level contamination logic now follows the active deforestation assessment rather than relying specifically on DEF01. | Ensures a critical deforestation result is propagated consistently regardless of whether DEF01 or DEF04 is used. |
DEF04 | v1.02 | Integrated into the simplified deforestation-routing logic as the primary assessment where commercial maps are available. | Provides a clearer hierarchy between commercial and public deforestation references. DEF04 overlap thresholds themselves remain unchanged. |
GEC01 | v1.01 | Increased Medium, High, and Critical overlap thresholds. | Reduces false-positive farm-boundary risk classifications. |
GEC02 | v1.01 | Same revised overlap thresholds applied when overlapping plots belong to the same farmer. | Provides more realistic tolerance for mapping inaccuracies. |
GEC03 | v1.01 | Same revised overlap thresholds applied when overlapping plots belong to different farmers. | Reduces overly strict classifications while retaining higher risk for substantial overlaps. |
GEC04 | v1.01 | Same revised overlap thresholds applied within the same aggregator. | Aligns aggregator-level overlap assessment with the updated GEC01 logic. |
GEC05 | v1.01 | Same revised overlap thresholds applied across different aggregators. | Aligns cross-aggregator overlap assessment with the updated GEC01 logic. |
GEC09 | v1.04 | Added a Brazil-specific distance exception: ≤50 km / 50–100 km / 100–200 km / ≥200 km. | The universal thresholds were considered too restrictive for the scale and distribution of Brazilian agricultural operations. |
GEP03 | v1.04 | Test is now skipped for soy datasets. | Analysis did not support a reliable universal upper farm-size threshold for soy production. |
GER01 | v1.01 | Added higher-accuracy national boundary sources for Brazil and Uganda. | National sources provide more precise geographic validation than the previous global-only reference approach. |
GER06 | v1.01 | Increased the geopoint boundary tolerance inside water bodies from 5 m to 15 m. | Reduces false positives caused by small coordinate or reference-layer inaccuracies near water-body boundaries. |
LGL03 | v3.00 | Replaced the previous single-overlap severity with differentiated IPLC risk categories. | Allows results to reflect the legal and territorial status of different IPLC areas rather than treating every overlap equally. |
LGL01 | v2.01 | Updated protected-area maps and legal context for 17 countries and introduced a dedicated Ivory Coast reference-layer approach. | Improves protected-area assessment using updated IBAT information, local data, and more granular interpretation of farming permissions. |
Before / after by test
Origin coverage
v1.11 expands the assessment framework with two additional origins.
| Before (v1.10) | Now (v1.11) |
China | Planned / not yet active | Supported |
Panama | Not supported | Supported |
Supported origins | Previous coverage | 47 origins |
The methodology's v1.11 change table explicitly identifies Panama and China as the new origins.
DEF01 / DEF02 / DEF04 — Simplified deforestation assessment
The main change is which deforestation reference is authoritative, rather than a change to the DEF04 overlap thresholds.
Before: v1.10
Where commercial DEF04 maps were available:
DEF01 still assessed the farm against public deforestation maps.
A DEF01 overlap was classified as High rather than Critical.
DEF04 separately assessed the farm using the commercial map.
DEF02 specifically propagated High or Critical outcomes originating from DEF01.
Where DEF04 was not available, a DEF01 overlap was Critical.
Now: v1.11
Where commercial maps are available:
DEF04 is used as the deforestation assessment.
DEF01 is skipped.
DEF02 propagates a Critical result from the applicable deforestation check to the farmer's associated plots.
Where commercial maps are not available, DEF01 continues to provide the deforestation assessment.
Scenario | Before (v1.10) | Now (v1.11) |
Commercial DEF04 map available | DEF01 + DEF04 could both contribute results | DEF04 prioritised; DEF01 skipped |
No DEF04 map available | DEF01 used | DEF01 used |
DEF01 overlap when no DEF04 exists | Critical | Critical |
DEF02 source | High/Critical result specifically from DEF01 | Critical result from the applicable deforestation check |
💡 The purpose of the change is logical simplification. v1.11 avoids presenting separate public-map and commercial-map deforestation assessments for the same origin when the commercial reference is available.
DEF04 severity thresholds
The actual DEF04 overlap thresholds did not change between v1.10 and v1.11.
Deforestation overlap | v1.10 | v1.11 |
Polygon: <5% overlap OR <250 m² | Low | Low |
Polygon: ≥5% and ≥250 m² OR >1,000 m² | Critical | Critical |
Geopoint outside deforestation area | Low | Low |
Geopoint inside deforestation area | Critical | Critical |
Medium / High | Not used | Not used |
GEC01–GEC05 — Farm plot overlap thresholds
The same revised percentage ladder is introduced across GEC01–GEC05.
Polygon overlap
Overlap | Before (v1.10) | Now (v1.11) |
<5% | Low | Low |
5–15% | Medium | Medium |
15–30% | High | Medium |
30–50% | Critical | High |
≥50% | Critical | Critical |
Expressed as the new v1.11 bands:
Risk | Before (v1.10) | Now (v1.11) |
Low | <5% | <5% |
Medium | 5–15% | 5–30% |
High | 15–30% | 30–50% |
Critical | ≥30% | ≥50% |
The updated ladder applies to:
GEC01 — Farm plot overlap with other farm plot(s)
GEC02 — Farm plot overlaps with same farmer ID
GEC03 — Farm plot overlaps with different farmer ID
GEC04 — Farm plot overlaps within aggregator datasets
GEC05 — Farm plot overlaps across aggregator datasets
The farmer-ID or aggregator conditions remain specific to each test.
Geopoints
The treatment of geopoints also becomes more lenient.
Situation | Before (v1.10) | Now (v1.11) |
Geopoint not located inside another polygon | Low | Low |
Geopoint located inside another polygon | Critical | High |
In v1.10, polygons containing geopoints could also be pushed into High or Critical classifications through additional combined conditions. The v1.11 thresholds are simpler and primarily follow the percentage-overlap ladder.
💡 The key effect is that 30% overlap no longer automatically means Critical. Critical risk begins at 50%, while the 15–30% band moves from High to Medium.
GEC09 — Brazil-specific farmer distance thresholds
Farm is distant from farms with same farmer ID
The universal thresholds remain unchanged:
Risk | Universal threshold |
Low | ≤10 km |
Medium | 10–20 km |
High | 20–50 km |
Critical | ≥50 km |
Brazil
Before v1.11, Brazil used the universal thresholds. v1.11 introduces a country exception:
Risk | Before — Brazil (v1.10) | Now — Brazil (v1.11) |
Low | ≤10 km | ≤50 km |
Medium | 10–20 km | 50–100 km |
High | 20–50 km | 100–200 km |
Critical | ≥50 km | ≥200 km |
Brazil therefore receives the same broader distance bands already used as an exception for Nigerian cocoa.
The change recognises that large-scale agricultural operations can have legitimate plots located much farther apart than the universal smallholder-oriented thresholds assume.
GEP03 — Soy farm-size assessment
Farm plot is extremely large
In v1.10, GEP03 still assessed soy farm sizes. A specific USA–soy exception allowed substantially larger farms:
Risk | USA–soy in v1.10 |
Low | <2,000 ha |
Medium | 2,000–4,999 ha |
High | 5,000–9,999 ha |
Critical | ≥10,000 ha |
In v1.11, the approach changes fundamentally:
| Before (v1.10) | Now (v1.11) |
Soy datasets | GEP03 applied | GEP03 skipped |
USA–soy thresholds | Specific thresholds applied | No longer required |
Non-soy datasets | GEP03 applied | GEP03 applied |
The existing country exceptions for non-soy datasets, including Brazil and Ecuador, remain.
💡 The change is not simply a larger soy threshold. v1.11 removes soy from this plausibility test entirely because the available analysis did not support a meaningful maximum farm-size threshold.
GER01 — Country boundary reference data
Farm is outside of country boundary
The scoring thresholds themselves remain unchanged:
Risk | Threshold |
Low | Inside country borders |
Medium | Crossing the border |
High | Fully outside, 1–500 m from border |
Critical | Fully outside, ≥500 m from border |
What changes is the reference data for Brazil and Uganda.
Country | Before (v1.10) | Now (v1.11) |
Brazil | Global country-boundary references | IBGE — Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, 2024 country boundaries |
Uganda | Global country-boundary references | Uganda Bureau of Statistics, 2018 administrative boundaries |
Other countries | U.S. Department of State + Flanders Marine Institute where applicable | Unchanged |
The country-specific sources provide higher-accuracy national boundary data while the existing global references remain available for other origins.
GER06 — Geopoint overlap with water bodies
Farm overlaps with water body
Polygon thresholds are unchanged:
Risk | Polygon overlap |
Low | No overlap |
Medium | 0–15% |
High | 15–30% |
Critical | ≥30% |
The change applies specifically to geopoints located inside a mapped water body.
Geopoint position | Before (v1.10) | Now (v1.11) |
Inside water body, close to boundary | High if ≤5 m | High if ≤15 m |
Deeper inside water body | Critical if >5 m | Critical if >15 m |
The additional 10 m tolerance reduces Critical classifications where small GNSS inaccuracies or reference-layer offsets could explain a geopoint being slightly inside the mapped water boundary.
LGL03 — IPLC risk assessment
Farm plot overlaps with an indigenous people or local communities territory
This is one of the most significant scoring changes in v1.11.
Before: v1.10
Situation | Risk |
No overlap | Low |
Any IPLC overlap | Medium |
High | Not used |
Critical | Not used |
All mapped IPLC territories were therefore treated equally.
Now: v1.11
Situation | Risk |
No overlap | Low |
Area not yet formally acknowledged | Medium |
Territory belonging to a local community | High |
Territory belonging to indigenous peoples | Critical |
v1.11 is based on a more extensive review of IPLC groups, territorial characteristics, national legislation, and relevant regulations.
The Portal can therefore communicate why a particular overlap receives Medium, High, or Critical risk instead of presenting all IPLC overlaps as the same category.
💡 This change makes LGL03 more nuanced but also potentially more stringent: overlaps that were universally Medium in v1.10 can become High or Critical in v1.11.
LGL01 — Protected areas
Farm overlaps with protected areas
v1.11 strengthens the use of country-specific legal context and updated protected-area reference data. The underlying severity framework remains based on the level of agricultural permission; the main change is the quality and interpretation of the reference layers.
Updated protected-area maps
The following 17 countries receive updated protected-area maps and more granular legal context:
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Costa Rica
Dominican Republic
Gabon
Laos
Madagascar
Malawi
Nicaragua
Mexico
Paraguay
Sierra Leone
El Salvador
Thailand
Timor-Leste
Tanzania
Uruguay
Venezuela
For these origins, v1.11 incorporates updated IBAT information and additional context on whether agriculture is prohibited, conditionally permitted, or generally permitted within specific protected areas.
Côte d’Ivoire / Ivory Coast
v1.11 also introduces a dedicated approach for Côte d’Ivoire because the existing protected-area information did not provide sufficient reliability on its own.
| Before (v1.10) | Now (v1.11) |
Main framework | IBAT / WDPA protected-area assessment | IBAT-based assessment with dedicated local exception/reference information |
Local information | Existing protected-area context | MINEF information incorporated alongside IBAT |
Decision logic | Standard protected-area classification | Additional internal decision-making and country-specific legal interpretation |
Purpose | Determine whether farming is permitted | Improve reliability and reduce misleading protected-area classifications |
This should not be confused with the later v1.12 update: in v1.11, local MINEF information is incorporated to complement and refine the Ivory Coast assessment; v1.12 subsequently moves to a new MINEF-based protected-area reference layer.
What did not change in v1.11
DEF04 overlap severity thresholds remain unchanged from v1.10. Small overlaps can still receive Low, and Medium/High are not used by DEF04.
DEF01 thresholds for origins without DEF04 remain unchanged: no overlap = Low and any overlap = Critical; geopoints ≥300 m from the nearest deforestation area remain Low.
GEC06–GEC08 duplicate-geometry tests are unchanged.
GET tests, including GET11, are unchanged in this release.
GEP01 and GEP02 are unchanged.
GER05 built-up-area assessment is unchanged.
GER10 geopoint-to-deforestation distance assessment is unchanged in v1.11.
GER01 severity thresholds are unchanged; only selected reference layers are improved.
GER06 polygon thresholds are unchanged; only the geopoint boundary-distance rule changes.
LGL01 severity logic remains based on protected-area restrictions and farming permissions; the major v1.11 change is reference-data and legal-context enhancement.
ATT, ATC, and ATP attribute tests are unchanged.