Why Waze and Google Maps Are Prioritising Eco-Routes in France

Across France, and increasingly in other countries, Waze and Google Maps are beginning to prioritise routes that produce less pollution instead of simply getting motorists to their destination as quickly as possible. This change, prompted by fresh regulation and pressure from public bodies, has angered users who believe their preferred apps have been “hijacked” by environmental objectives.

Why your usual fastest route has disappeared

In France, a government decree (n° 2022-1199) now obliges digital journey planners to highlight itineraries with the lowest greenhouse gas emissions. As a result, the conventional route based on the shortest journey time or distance is not necessarily the first option presented to drivers.

Waze and Google Maps users are increasingly noticing the same trend: the leading recommendation is often a marginally longer route that avoids high-speed stretches or severe congestion, while displaying its greener credentials on screen.

Navigation apps must now put low-emission routes front and centre, even when they take longer or cover more distance.

This decree is more than a minor interface change. Where a journey includes a section with a speed limit of at least 110 km/h, apps must provide an alternative route that reduces speeds by 20 km/h. In practice, that may involve using a national road rather than a motorway, or choosing ring roads and secondary connections instead of the quickest expressway.

How Waze and Google Maps are changing in practice

For motorists, these changes can appear in a number of forms:

• The first suggested journey is frequently marked as more eco-friendly, with lower estimated CO₂ emissions.
• The “fastest” journey remains available, but may be listed as a secondary choice rather than the default.
• Estimated fuel use and emissions are shown more prominently, encouraging drivers to reconsider before selecting the quickest option.

The shift forms part of a broader trend in the technology sector. Google Maps and Waze have both trialled “eco-routing” tools in several countries, working out routes that reduce fuel consumption using gradients, speed patterns and normal traffic conditions.

In France, legal requirements turn this idea from a recommendation into a central duty. Apps that plan multimodal journeys - combining cars, public transport, cycling and walking - are specifically instructed to “put forward” the options with the lowest emissions.

Angry drivers, new rules

Many drivers have been taken by surprise. On forums and social media, users accuse the apps of “lying” about the best journey, or of directing them along less familiar roads in pursuit of climate targets.

Some motorists say they are losing precious minutes each day because their navigation app is prioritising CO₂ over their schedule.

Others describe confusion when their regular motorway commute is no longer the first recommendation, despite remaining legal and still being an available choice. For people driving under time constraints - delivery workers, ride-hailing drivers and carers making visits - even a small diversion can soon become a financial burden rather than a simple irritation.

Trust is another issue. These apps secured their place on dashboards by promising rigorous optimisation of time and distance. Once that principle changes and the criteria are no longer solely practical, some users feel that the arrangement has changed without their agreement.

Behind the shift: law and public pressure

The French decree is part of a wider effort to reduce transport emissions and control congestion. Road traffic is a significant contributor to CO₂ and air pollution, while navigation apps exert considerable influence over where vehicles travel and when they do so.

That influence is especially important during major events. Before the Paris 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games, Île-de-France Mobilités - the regional transport authority - warned that serious gridlock could result if everyone followed “shortest time” recommendations into the same bottlenecks.

The region urged Google to modify Maps so that alternative routes, including other transport modes, were strongly promoted. Its message was clear: if private apps declined to cooperate, the authorities could request that they be switched off in sensitive areas on public-safety grounds.

The dedicated “Île-de-France Mobilités” app was built around this approach from the outset. Rather than cutting every possible minute from an individual’s journey, it aims to distribute traffic across the network, ease peak flows and limit the risk of complete paralysis.

From shortest route to “smartest” route

Authorities maintain that a route which takes two minutes longer but avoids a bottleneck may save time for everyone overall. If a navigation app sends tens of thousands of cars through one junction because it is 30 seconds quicker, the outcome can be a major traffic jam.

By nudging some drivers onto slightly longer roads, regulators hope to prevent the sort of gridlock that traps everyone for an hour.

From that viewpoint, emissions and congestion are closely linked. A smoother, slower route at 90 km/h may consume less fuel than a stop-start motorway journey signed at 130 km/h where traffic scarcely moves.

What these eco-routes actually change for drivers

Eco-routing is not a miracle solution, but it is based on several well-established principles of vehicle energy use. For modern petrol and diesel cars, consistent speeds within a moderate range generally use less fuel than rapid acceleration, sharp braking and very high speeds.

These are some common differences between a “fastest” motorway journey and an “eco” alternative:

Aspect	Fastest route	Eco-focused route
Average speed	Higher, with frequent stops in congestion	Moderate and more regular
Distance	Usually shorter	Can be slightly longer
Fuel use	Higher in real conditions if traffic is dense	Lower thanks to smoother driving
CO₂ emissions	Higher per trip in heavy traffic	Lower despite extra kilometres
Stress level	Often high in jams and tight merges	Can be calmer on secondary roads

For electric vehicles, apps may also account for battery management by favouring journeys that limit high-speed sections, which can quickly reduce range.

Can you still force the shortest route?

In most situations, drivers can still explore the settings and move their preferences back towards the fastest or shortest itineraries, although the eco-option often continues to be highlighted. The degree of control differs between apps and countries, and some alterations are introduced gradually through server-side updates rather than visible app releases.

At present, French rules focus on the route that is put “forward” by default. That still gives experienced users the option of making a few additional taps to select the traditional motorway dash - provided they are prepared to overlook the green labels and the higher emissions figures displayed to them.

A number of examples show the possible effect:

• A commuter may find that a 35-minute motorway route has moved into second place, while a 40-minute national road journey is highlighted as greener.
• A family travelling on holiday might receive an “eco” route that remains at 110 km/h rather than 130 km/h for most of the trip, adding 20 minutes to a six-hour journey while saving fuel.
• A delivery driver in a densely populated urban area may be directed along slightly longer avenues with less stop-start traffic, reducing fuel use but extending working time.

What “less polluting route” really means

When apps refer to “low emissions”, they generally assess several elements: distance, usual speeds, changes in elevation and historic traffic information. Their algorithms estimate the fuel a typical vehicle uses on every road segment before adding the totals together for the whole journey.

The green route is not necessarily the slowest or the most rural one; it is the path that models say wastes the least energy.

This is important because many motorists assume that a motorway is always the most efficient option. That may be correct over long, clear sections travelled at a steady pace, but not when traffic breaks down near large cities. A consistent 90–100 km/h on a ring road can sometimes outperform a theoretical 130 km/h motorway trip that repeatedly slows to 20 km/h in congestion.

Broader effects: from individual annoyance to collective gains

Policy makers expect minor individual adjustments to create a cumulative effect. If millions of motorists accept journeys that are two or three minutes longer, national transport CO₂ figures could change noticeably. Lower fuel consumption also reduces oil imports and local air pollution, particularly around busy junctions and motorways.

There are potential drawbacks as well. Longer routes could raise accident exposure on smaller roads or channel heavy traffic through towns that were not designed for it. Regulators and app developers will need to monitor unintended effects and refine the algorithms and rules so that “eco” does not merely mean “offload the problem onto another neighbourhood”.

For everyday users beyond France, these developments provide an indication of what may come. As more governments introduce climate legislation, route planning is likely to move further away from pure speed towards a balance between time, emissions and road safety. Drivers who understand these trade-offs - and can interpret the small CO₂ icons on their screens - will be better able to select the routes that genuinely suit them.