We use privacy-by-default, cookieless analytics.

Optional analytics cookies are used only if you accept them.

Read our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

ESPRTrackerEU

ESPR product priorities and delegated acts tracker

A tracker for the products and horizontal measures selected in the adopted ESPR and Energy Labelling Working Plan 2025-2030.

Use it to keep indicative adoption years, adopted acts, application dates, DPP requirements, owners, and evidence in separate fields.

Back to main artifactReview sources
Author
Sorena AI
Published
May 9, 2026
Updated
Jul 25, 2026
Sections
4

Structured answer sets in this page tree.

Primary sources
8

Cited legal and guidance references.

Publication metadata
Sorena AI
Published May 9, 2026
Updated Jul 25, 2026
Overview

The adopted 2025-2030 working plan gives a defined first set of ESPR product and horizontal workstreams, but it does not make their future requirements applicable. Track each workstream from working-plan priority through study, consultation, draft, adoption, entry into force, transition, and application. The relevant or implementing act, not the plan's indicative year, supplies the binding product scope and requirements.

Section 1

Seed the tracker from the adopted 2025-2030 working plan

Start with the groups the Commission actually selected in COM(2025) 187 final, adopted on 16 April 2025. Article 18 supplied a broader list for priority consideration, but the working plan selected a narrower set and explained the omissions.

Keep one row per act or measure. Furniture and mattresses need separate rows because their indicative adoption years differ. Textiles/apparel and footwear also need separate rows because footwear was left for a study rather than included in the planned textiles/apparel act.

  • Final products: textiles/apparel - indicative adoption 2027; tyres - 2027; furniture - 2028; mattresses - 2029.
  • Intermediate products: iron and steel - indicative adoption 2026; aluminium - 2027.
  • Horizontal measures: repairability, including scoring - indicative adoption 2027; recycled content and recyclability of electrical and electronic equipment - 2029.
  • Deferred or separate treatment: footwear was assigned a study due by the end of 2027; chemicals were assigned further scope work; detergents, paints, and lubricants were not selected as new product priorities.
  • Carry-over work: keep energy-related product revisions in separate rows tied to the applicable existing measure and its own workstream rather than assuming every row is a new ESPR .
Sources for this answer
Regulation (EU) 2024/1781, Article 18
Binding ESPR source for the first-working-plan product groups to be considered and the rule that the working plan sets priorities and estimated timelines.
Ecodesign for Sustainable Products and Energy Labelling Working Plan 2025-2030
Official Commission communication for the selected product groups, horizontal measures, indicative adoption years, deferred groups, and carry-over work.
Recommended next step

Turn ESPR priority tracking into cited work

This tracker helps separate adopted ESPR framework duties, preliminary priority research, delegated-act monitoring, DPP readiness, owners, evidence, and source gaps.

Research workflow
Open Research Copilot

Answer ESPR and DPP implementation questions with cited source material.

Explore next step
Talk to Sorena
Discuss ESPR implementation

Review product scope, delegated-act monitoring, and DPP evidence gaps with Sorena.

Explore next step
Section 2

Status labels for non-binding and adopted sources

Do not flatten all sources into one compliance status. A JRC preliminary ranking, a Commission working plan, a CIRPASS architecture report, and an adopted carry different weight.

Use plain status labels so reviewers can see whether a row is a watchlist item, an adopted planning signal, or an enforceable product rule.

  • Preliminary, non-binding: JRC studies, technical studies, consultations, and draft measures; useful for scoping evidence, not for final obligations.
  • Adopted planning signal: the Commission working plan and its indicative adoption year; useful for scheduling regulatory monitoring, but not a compliance deadline.
  • Adopted legal framework: ESPR Articles 5, 9, 10, 11, and 18; binding framework rules, but still dependent on product-specific delegated acts for concrete product requirements.
  • Adopted implementing measure: a DPP registry rule, disclosure format, or similar measure can bind its stated actors and process without creating product-group ecodesign requirements outside its scope.
  • Official Journal standards citation: publication can create a presumption of conformity for the legal requirements covered by the cited standard or part. It does not create a separate product-group obligation or extend the underlying law.
  • Adopted : use only when the final Article 4 act is identified and cited. Add separate fields for entry into force and application because ESPR generally gives at least 18 months to comply, subject to stated exceptions.
  • Applicable requirement: use only after the act's application date and any relevant transition condition have been checked.
Sources for this answer
JRC preliminary study on new ESPR product priorities
JRC technical report used for non-binding priority analysis, product-scope ideas, and preliminary horizontal-measure context.
Regulation (EU) 2024/1781, Articles 5 and 18
Binding framework source for product aspects, horizontal requirements, and working-plan prioritisation mechanics.
Section 3

Delegated-act and expected DPP impact fields

Keep delegated-act tracking separate from DPP readiness. ESPR Article 9 requires each applicable to specify whether a DPP is required and, if so, the data, carrier, placement, granularity, access rights, actors allowed to create or update data, and availability period.

Prepare source systems and ownership against those categories, but leave product-specific values marked unconfirmed until the adopted act supplies them.

  • Delegated-act fields: act title, CELEX or ELI URL, legal status, adoption date, entry into force, application date, transition conditions, product group and exclusions, product aspects, performance requirements, information requirements, conformity assessment, and review date.
  • DPP fields: required or exempted, model/batch/item level, data to include, data carrier, placement, customer pre-contract access, access-right groups, data creators or updaters, update process, and availability period.
  • Expected-impact fields: sustainability data model workstream, supplier data requests, labelling or data-carrier workstream, authority-verification evidence, repair/refurbishment/recycling data needs, and IT resolver or access-control dependency.
  • Blocked-fact fields: product application dates, penalties, mandatory DPP field names, thresholds, and technical formats unless the relevant adopted act or published specification is cited.
Sources for this answer
Regulation (EU) 2024/1781, Articles 9-11
Binding source for the product-specific DPP items that delegated acts must specify and for DPP design principles such as unique identifiers, data carriers, interoperability, access rights, security, and data integrity.
Section 4

Owner, evidence, and review cadence

Assign ownership by tracker field, not just by regulation. Product compliance should own product-group scope and delegated-act status; sustainability should own product-aspect evidence; supply chain should own supplier data availability; IT or data architecture should own DPP system dependencies; legal should approve source-status labels.

Evidence should show what is known and what the cited sources do not yet support. Keep the DPP data model provisional until the applicable specifies it. Close or downgrade a row only with a recorded reason, such as a final act excluding the product, a workstream being withdrawn, or a superseding measure replacing the tracked source.

  • Owner fields: product compliance lead, legal reviewer, sustainability data owner, supplier-data owner, IT or DPP architecture owner, label or data-carrier owner, and final approver.
  • Evidence fields: cited source URL, source status label, short supported claim, affected SKUs or product families, open source gap, next review trigger, and decision log.
  • Review triggers: a working-plan update, preparatory-study milestone, Ecodesign Forum consultation, Commission draft, scrutiny period, publication of the final act, Official Journal standards reference, or DPP implementing measure.
  • Decision evidence: preserve the source version and review date, then record why a planned year did or did not change the project schedule. Do not silently convert a missed indicative year into a new legal deadline.
Sources for this answer
Ecodesign for Sustainable Products and Energy Labelling Working Plan 2025-2030
Official source for the plan's indicative timelines, stakeholder process, product selection, and scheduled review context.
CIRPASS project results: DPP system architecture
CIRPASS project page describing the DPP architecture report as a proposal based on product identifiers and interoperable HTTP URI or DID-based approaches; use as technical preparation, not legal obligation.
Primary sources

References and citations

CIRPASS project results
cirpassproject.eu
Referenced sections
  • CIRPASS technical source for DPP architecture and implementation concepts such as product identifiers, resolver patterns, and role-aware access; not an adopted ESPR delegated act.
CIRPASS project results: DPP system architecture
cirpassproject.eu
Referenced sections
  • CIRPASS project page describing the DPP architecture report as a proposal based on product identifiers and interoperable HTTP URI or DID-based approaches; use as technical preparation, not legal obligation.
Regulation (EU) 2024/1781 (ESPR)
data.europa.eu
Referenced sections
  • Binding ESPR framework source for product aspects, DPP requirements through delegated acts, working-plan priorities, and the Article 18 first-working-plan product groups.
Regulation (EU) 2024/1781, Article 18
data.europa.eu
Referenced sections
  • Binding ESPR source for the first-working-plan product groups to be considered and the rule that the working plan sets priorities and estimated timelines.
Regulation (EU) 2024/1781, Articles 9-11
data.europa.eu
Referenced sections
  • Binding source for the product-specific DPP items that delegated acts must specify and for DPP design principles such as unique identifiers, data carriers, interoperability, access rights, security, and data integrity.
Related guides

Explore more topics

ESPR and DPP connection: delegated acts, identifiers, and access
How ESPR connects ecodesign information requirements to Digital Product Passports, including delegated acts, data carriers, identifiers, access rights, registry, and architecture choices.
ESPR Applicability Test for Products and DPP Readiness
A cited ESPR applicability test for physical product scope, exclusions, delegated-act dependency, economic operator triage, DPP readiness, unsold goods, and evidence.
ESPR compliance checklist for delegated acts and DPP readiness
A cited ESPR checklist for monitoring delegated acts, mapping product requirements, preparing technical documentation, and building DPP and unsold-goods evidence.
ESPR compliance program operating model
Build an ESPR operating model for product-group intake, delegated-act monitoring, supplier evidence, DPP governance, release gates, and authority response.
ESPR compliance: delegated acts, DPP and evidence
Practical ESPR compliance guidance for mapping product delegated acts, Digital Product Passport dependencies, unsold goods duties, technical documentation, standards, and market-surveillance evidence.
ESPR deadlines and compliance calendar
Cited ESPR calendar for framework dates, delegated-act dependency, working-plan monitoring, unsold-goods disclosure, and DPP readiness limits.
ESPR delegated act intake by product group
A product-group intake checklist for ESPR delegated acts, covering product identification, DPP data, ecodesign requirements, conformity evidence, transition dates, and source limits.
ESPR delegated act intake workflow
A source-based intake workflow for ESPR delegated acts: trigger checks, product-group scope, requirement extraction, DPP impacts, release gates, owners, and evidence outputs.
ESPR delegated acts FAQ: product rules, DPP impact, and monitoring
Standalone FAQ on ESPR delegated acts, why product-group duties depend on them, what teams should monitor, and how they shape Digital Product Passport information.
ESPR delegated acts watchlist for product and DPP teams
Track the adopted ESPR 2025-2030 working plan, indicative delegated-act years, product scope, DPP dependencies, evidence owners, and unresolved legal details.
ESPR destruction ban and unsold goods FAQ
What ESPR says about preventing destruction of unsold consumer products, annual disclosure, the Annex VII apparel and footwear ban, and cited derogation evidence.
ESPR destruction of unsold goods: disclosure, ban scope, and records
Cited ESPR guide to unsold consumer product disclosure, destruction-ban scope, records, derogations, and national enforcement limits.
ESPR DPP information mapping workflow
Map ESPR delegated-act information requirements into DPP data elements, source systems, access levels, identifiers, carriers, validation evidence, and unresolved design decisions.
ESPR durability, repairability, and recyclability evidence
Build ESPR evidence for durability, repairability, and recyclability without inventing product-group tests before the applicable delegated act is known.
ESPR Ecodesign Evidence Checklist
Checklist for collecting ESPR ecodesign evidence from delegated acts, technical documentation, supplier substantiation, DPP mapping, standards, and market surveillance records.
ESPR ecodesign requirement types: performance, information, and DPP links
Official source guide to ESPR ecodesign requirement types, product parameters, delegated-act dependency, DPP links, and evidence implications.
ESPR FAQ: scope, delegated acts, DPP, unsold goods
Standalone ESPR FAQ answers on product scope, delegated acts, Digital Product Passports, unsold goods, product priorities, standards, surveillance, and source limits.
ESPR harmonised standards and common specifications
How ESPR uses harmonised standards, common specifications, and the six DPP standards cited in Decision (EU) 2026/1736.
ESPR Information Requirements to DPP Mapping
Map ESPR information requirements into Digital Product Passport data classes, source systems, access rules, carrier choices, validation checks, and evidence records.
ESPR Information Requirements, Labels, and Disclosure
Source-cited ESPR guide to delegated-act information requirements, product labels, digital product passport access, data carriers, and unsold-goods disclosure.
ESPR market surveillance FAQ: evidence, DPP data, and authority requests
Standalone FAQ on ESPR market surveillance: technical documentation, conformity evidence, DPP data, authority response, delegated-act limits, and national penalties.
ESPR market surveillance technical documentation checklist
Source-cited ESPR checklist for technical documentation, conformity evidence, DPP records, and responses to market surveillance authority requests.
ESPR penalties and fines: Member State rules and evidence
ESPR penalties guide explaining Article 74, why fine amounts depend on Member State law, and which conformity and market-surveillance records matter.
ESPR product priorities FAQ: working plan and delegated acts
Standalone FAQ on ESPR product priorities, the Commission working plan, delegated-act dependency, monitoring points, and limits of preliminary source material.
ESPR requirements: delegated acts, ecodesign, DPP, and evidence
ESPR requirements explained as a framework for delegated acts, ecodesign performance and information rules, Digital Product Passports, unsold goods, technical documentation, and market surveillance.
ESPR Timeline: Fixed Dates and Delegated-Act Phasing
A cited ESPR timeline separating fixed framework milestones from product-specific application dates, DPP readiness, unsold-goods duties, surveillance, and evaluation.
ESPR unsold goods disclosure FAQ
Standalone FAQ on the ESPR Article 24 duty to disclose discarded unsold consumer products, its relationship to the destruction ban, records, and source limits.
ESPR unsold goods disclosure tracker
Track ESPR unsold-product disclosures under Regulation (EU) 2026/2 and destruction-ban derogations under Regulation (EU) 2026/296.
ESPR vs Batteries Regulation Comparison
Compare ESPR delegated-act planning with the Batteries Regulation product-specific regime, including DPP overlap, battery passport evidence, timing limits, and source boundaries.
ESPR vs Ecodesign Directive
Compare ESPR with the earlier Ecodesign Directive across scope, legal form, delegated acts, DPP requirements, unsold goods, transition rules, and evidence.
ESPR vs GPSR: Sustainability vs Product Safety
A scope-bounded comparison of ESPR sustainability and product-information requirements against GPSR product-safety context, with evidence and DPP reuse limits.
ESPR vs PPWR Comparison
Compare ESPR product ecodesign and Digital Product Passport duties with PPWR packaging design, labelling, conformity, producer-responsibility, and waste obligations.
ESPR vs REACH and RoHS Comparison
Compare ESPR ecodesign, sustainability, information, and digital product passport requirements with separately sourced REACH and RoHS substance-control context.
EU ESPR DPP obligations FAQ
Standalone FAQ on Digital Product Passport obligations under ESPR, covering delegated acts, identifiers, carriers, access rights, data governance, and supplier evidence limits.
What ESPR is and why it matters
An official source explainer of the EU Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation, including scope, delegated acts, DPPs, unsold goods, and enforcement limits.
Which products are in scope of the EU ESPR?
Standalone FAQ on ESPR product scope, excluded products, delegated-act dependency, working-plan monitoring, and the digital product passport link.