Europe’s withdrawal from regulatory leadership could leave developing countries vulnerable

Europe’s withdrawal from regulatory leadership could leave developing countries vulnerable. | Photo: Viktor Talashuk

For decades, the European Union has served as the world’s de facto regulator. Its environmental and chemical-safety frameworks set standards far beyond its borders, creating what scholars call the “Brussels effect” — the quiet export of European norms through global trade and supply chains. Yet as Brussels moves to streamline its complex network of sustainability and safety laws, the consequences could extend well beyond the continent, reshaping the global regulatory order.

The European Commission maintains that easing reporting rules and merging compliance systems will reduce red tape without undermining environmental protection. However, critics — including senior United Nations officials — caution that even minor dilution could reverberate across developing economies. Many low- and middle-income countries model their regulations on EU directives, treating them as a stable anchor of credibility. When that anchor shifts, the ripple effects are immediate, weakening oversight and diminishing leverage in international negotiations.

The Hidden Costs of Simplification

At the core of this debate lies a paradox. Simplification appears efficient, yet in regulatory ecosystems, complexity often upholds integrity. The EU’s robust chemicals legislation, for instance, has inspired over fifty national frameworks across Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Those systems depend on a strong European baseline to justify domestic reforms against industry pressure.

If that benchmark softens, industrial lobbies in developing nations may claim their governments are over-regulating compared with Europe. According to a 2024 European Environmental Bureau report, 70 per cent of developing-country regulators directly reference EU directives when drafting chemical and waste-management rules. Without this external model, progress towards safer production and circular-economy goals risks stagnation.

Shifting Regulatory Gravity

Europe’s retreat from strict rule-making could also embolden corporate lobbying. Multinational companies operating across both hemispheres may now press for lighter regulation globally. While such alignment may reduce costs in the short term, it risks deepening the environmental divide between rich and poor nations. As one African environment minister observed earlier this year, “When Europe lowers the bar, we lose the argument for ambition.”

This development exposes a structural dependency within global governance: many developing states lack the capacity to produce independent regulatory science. They rely instead on the normative gravity of Northern institutions. Should those institutions favour efficiency over rigour, the entire architecture of sustainability governance could begin to tilt.

A Delicate Step Backward

The European Commission insists that its reforms remain compatible with the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly those addressing responsible consumption and production. Yet the long-term risks are evident. Simplification without robust safeguards could fragment the international regulatory landscape, eroding both environmental integrity and fair competition.

A more credible path would be to co-design simplified frameworks with developing partners, ensuring that European administrative gains do not translate into global vulnerabilities. Transparency, inclusive scientific dialogue, and capacity-building initiatives would allow the EU to retain leadership while acknowledging the realities of the Global South.

The future of global sustainability rests on both ambition and consistency. Europe’s standards — once the benchmark of environmental governance — must not become a moving target. The administrative ease achieved in Brussels should not come at the expense of ecosystems and labour conditions in developing regions.

Source: Financial Times and GSN, “Developing countries at risk from EU’s simplification drive, UN warns,” 27 October 2025 – ft.com

For further reading: European Environmental Bureau; OECD Environmental Policy Reviews.