ERWAY
Company

We build the system that turns a map into a filing

ERWAY exists because deforestation regulation asks a geospatial question and most supply chains can only answer a paperwork one. We close that gap — from a supplier's plot boundary to a submitted EU Due Diligence Statement, with the evidence attached at every step.

Read our storySee the platform

Geospatial, not paperwork

Plot geometry, satellite evidence and the filing itself in one system, rather than three teams and a shared drive.

Built for the person who signs

Every verdict traces back to the data and the rule that produced it, because someone has to defend it.

Two products, one engine

The same field boundaries and imagery serve EUDR compliance and crop monitoring.

Our story

A compliance problem that was really a mapping problem

When the EU Deforestation Regulation landed, the conversation in most sourcing teams was about documents. Which certificate, which attestation, which supplier declaration. That framing was comfortable, familiar — and wrong.

The regulation asks for geolocation. Not a country, not a region, not a mill: the plot of land where the commodity was produced, with coordinates, checked against what satellites recorded there after the end of 2020. That is a geospatial question, and it does not get easier by being answered in a spreadsheet. The people we spoke to knew this. They were already trying — exporting polygons from one tool, scoring them by eye in another, chasing supplier questionnaires by email, and rebuilding the whole picture by hand every time an auditor asked a question.

The bottleneck was never that people did not want to comply. It was that compliance had been specified in a language their systems could not speak.

So we built for that gap specifically, rather than adding a deforestation module to something that already existed. That meant starting further back than most products do — with whether a plot boundary is even admissible before anyone tries to score it — and finishing further forward, at the filed statement rather than at a report someone else has to act on.

What we ended up with is narrower and more opinionated than a general-purpose GIS, and considerably more specific than a supplier-questionnaire platform. It is a system for people who have to put their name on an answer about land they have never visited, and be able to show their working when someone asks.

Our journey

How the platform got to where it is

Phases, not dates. This is the order the work happened in, and why that order — not a timetable.

  1. The problem, seen up close

    A regulation with a map at the centre of it

    EUDR does not ask for a policy document. It asks where a commodity was grown, plot by plot, and expects you to prove it. The teams on the hook for that answer were working across spreadsheets, email threads and a GIS licence nobody in compliance could open. The gap was never willingness — it was that no single system spoke both languages.

  2. Getting the geometry right first

    Before scoring anything, prove the plot

    The first thing built was not a risk score. It was the validation that decides whether a plot's geometry is admissible at all — structure, topology, location, duplication — because a score computed on a bad polygon is a confident wrong answer, and a confident wrong answer is worse than no answer on a filing you have to sign.

  3. Turning imagery into evidence

    A verdict you can hand to an auditor

    Satellite layers, a fixed deforestation baseline and a decision pathway per commodity replaced the single blunt rule. A timber plantation, a coffee grove and a soy field leave completely different signatures on the same satellite record. The point was never the score — it was that every score can be traced back to what produced it.

  4. Closing the loop to submission

    From geometry to a filed statement, in one system

    Risk work that ends in a PDF leaves the hardest step manual. Assessment, mitigation evidence and the Due Diligence Statement were joined up so the last mile stopped being a separate project with its own spreadsheet and its own person chasing it.

  5. The same engine, a second problem

    Plant Health

    The machinery that watches a plot for deforestation can watch the same plot for how the crop is doing. Plant Health came out of that: the same field boundaries and the same imagery, scored for growers, cooperatives and lenders instead of for regulators — and written in language none of them need a GIS background to read.

  6. Built to be plugged in

    An API before an integration request

    Compliance data only earns its keep where the buying, the contracts and the ERP already live. The platform was designed to be called by those systems rather than to become one more place someone has to remember to log into.

What we believe

Six commitments, each with somewhere to go and check

A principle nobody can verify is a slogan. These all point at something already shipped.

If it isn't shipped, we draw it as unfinished

Roadmap capability is rendered dashed and faded everywhere on this site, and it is never a link. On a compliance product, presenting intent as shipped capability is not marketing — it is a false statement, and it is the kind that surfaces during an audit.

See the data layers

Every claim is sourced and dated

What we publish on EUDR cites the consolidated text and the Commission's guidance, carries a publication date and a review date, and lists its sources at the foot of the page. Regulation moves. Undated guidance quietly becomes wrong, and nobody notices until it matters.

Read the resources

Show the reasoning, not just the verdict

A plot is never scored by one blunt rule, so we publish the decision structure: the validation gates, the per-commodity pathways, and what each outcome actually means. Our calibration stays confidential. The logic does not — you are the one who has to defend the filing.

See the decision logic

Plain language is a product requirement

Nothing a user reads names a spectral index, a satellite product or a GIS concept. Crop greenness, leaf moisture, ground cover. If the person who has to act on a number cannot read it, the number has not been delivered — it has only been computed.

See Plant Health

Security is a build constraint, not a review stage

This site is statically built: no backend, no cookies, no third-party origins, and a content policy strict enough that we hand-wrote a menu component rather than loosen it for a dependency. You do not have to take that on trust — open the network tab and read the response headers.

Built to be called, not to be logged into

Compliance data earns its keep inside the systems where buying and contracting already happen. So the platform is an API first and a screen second, and the screen is there for the work that genuinely needs a human looking at a map.

See the integration

How we work

What working with us actually looks like

1

We start with your data, not a deck

Send a sample of real supplier geometry — a GeoJSON export, a shapefile, whatever you already hold. We would rather show you the platform reading your plots than a demo tenant reading ours.

2

We tell you what is missing

The first output is usually uncomfortable: which plots fail validation, which have no coordinates at all, which are duplicated across suppliers. That gap list is the honest starting point for everything after it.

3

We map it to how you already work

Commodity mix, supplier tiers, who signs off and where the data has to land afterwards. The platform bends to that shape through the API rather than asking your sourcing team to adopt a new one.

4

We stay in it after go-live

Regulation moves, baselines get revised and supply bases change. The parts of the system that encode those rules are ours to keep current, not yours to re-learn each season.

What's next

Being built now. Not available yet.

Marked the same way unshipped capability is marked everywhere else on this site — dashed, and not a link.

In progress

Deeper supplier self-service

Letting producers submit and correct their own plot geometry, with validation feedback at the point of entry rather than three weeks later.

In progress

Wider commodity coverage

Decision pathways for the parts of the regulation's scope where the satellite signature is hardest to read cleanly.

In progress

Portfolio-level change monitoring

Standing watch across an entire supply base, so a new alert finds you rather than waiting for the next assessment cycle.

Contact

Talk to the people who build it

Not a sales queue. Either route reaches the same people — the form just asks the three questions on the right so we do not have to.

Book a demoThe form fills in the email for you, then hands it to your mail app.Email uscontact@erwaysolutions.comTry it before you writeThe interactive tour takes about two minutes and needs nothing from you.

What to send

  • The commodities you place on the EU market, and roughly how many suppliers sit behind them.
  • Whatever plot geometry you already hold — even if you suspect it is incomplete. Especially then.
  • Where the answer has to end up afterwards: an ERP, a procurement system, a data warehouse.

If you are early enough that you do not have any of this yet, say so. Working out what you are missing is the first thing we would do together anyway.

The quickest way to understand us is to use what we built

Everything on this page is a claim about how we work. The demo is the evidence — two minutes, no sign-up, and it runs the same screens our customers do.

See how the system worksBook a demo