Claims versus evidence
We separate verified facts, unsupported claims, outdated records, contradictions and items that require local verification.
Independent EUDR exposure intelligence
Your EUDR file may be complete. Your exposure may not be.
NinfraEU tests supplier, geolocation and evidence claims against the available chain, geography and operational reality — with a specialist focus on Brazil and the Amazon frontier.
The commercial question is no longer whether EUDR is coming.
It is which supplier, plot, chain and public claim will fail serious scrutiny first.
Documentation can be orderly while the underlying exposure remains unresolved.
Platforms, certificates and supplier declarations are inputs. A management decision still requires an evidence-led view of what is proven, what is inferred and what has not been checked.
Direct and indirect exposure
For cattle, soy, leather, coffee and other chains, the highest-consequence risk may sit before the direct supplier enters the record.
Geography versus operations
A polygon does not explain aggregation, mixing, transport routes, local legality, land conflict or the integrity of the physical chain.
Start with the decision you actually need to make.
Every assignment is scoped around a defined organisation, product flow, supplier set or claim. No open-ended consulting mandate is required.
EUDR Exposure Brief
€2,500–€5,000
- rapid document and chain scan
- priority information gaps
- supplier, region and claim red flags
- claim-versus-evidence matrix
- board-directed next decision
Best for triage: close, repair internally or commission a deeper assessment.
EUDR Reality Gap Assessment
€7,500–€25,000
- chain reconstruction
- geolocation and source review
- direct and indirect supplier exposure
- actor and responsibility matrix
- defensible scenarios and management briefing
Core product for supply chains where paper compliance is not sufficient assurance.
Wildfire / Biomass Exposure
€7,500–€20,000
- fuel and biomass chain
- operational and governance gaps
- damage and escalation scenarios
- evidence register
- defensible conclusions
For insurers, investors, project owners, counsel and public decision-makers.
Brazil–Europe intelligence bridge
The missing layer is often not another dashboard.
NinfraEU combines European decision logic with fluent Brazilian Portuguese, long-term Brazil and Amazon experience, corridor and logistics awareness, and a disciplined evidence method. The work is designed to test the space between formal documentation and what the chain can actually support.
A report that tells management what is known — and what follows.
The structure is designed for legal, compliance, procurement, risk, investment and board use.
Evidence position
Confirmed, contradicted, unproven, outdated, inferred or requiring field verification.
Exposure map
Relevant suppliers, processors, municipalities, transport nodes, product flows and potentially responsible actors.
Decision scenarios
Proceed, conditional go, request evidence, mitigate, pause, remediate or disengage.
Management handoff
Executive report, evidence register, priority questions and a concise board briefing.
Clear professional boundary
The assessment provides independent intelligence and decision support. It is not legal advice, statutory certification, an audit opinion or a guarantee that an organisation, product or supply chain is EUDR-compliant.
Field verification is separately scoped
Remote evidence review comes first. Local verification is commissioned only when it can materially resolve a defined information gap and when safety, legality, access, timing and budget are clear.
Identify the weak claim before somebody else does.
Send the product, supplier, origin region and decision you are facing. We will respond with a tightly bounded scope, price and evidence request.