Land rights disputes and violations are one of the most frequently cited legality risks in agricultural supply chains — and one of the hardest to verify. Regulations like EUDR require companies to demonstrate that the land on which their commodities were produced was used legally, that rights of neighbouring communities and indigenous peoples been respected in the process, and that Free, Prior and Informed Consent was obtained where relevant. In practice, land titles are often informal, overlapping, or absent. Stakeholder engagement processes are frequently undocumented.
Under the EUDR implementing guidance, companies are explicitly required to provide evidence of this continuous consultation (FPIC) when any new activities of the operation might affect them and their territories. For most sourcing teams, this is where practice becomes challenging: maintaining an ongoing dialogue with stakeholders, document it and be prepared to adapt operations accordingly.
This session examines what verification of land rights actually requires what evidence companies need, what a competent authority will look for, and how an on-site audit uncovers the nuances that determine whether a sourcing relationship is genuinely compliant or simply assumed to be.
We also look at what happens when gaps are found: what meaningful engagement from companies and supply chain partners can realistically look like, and how improvement processes are structured in practice.
Regulations provide the legal reference point. But compliance is built on the ground.
