FSC certification alone won’t be enough to ensure IKEA is compliant with Europe’s incoming deforestation regulation — and the furniture giant needs to fundamentally overhaul how it traces timber back to harvest. That is according to the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) — the independent environmental watchdog — whose senior commodities policy manager, Rick Jacobsen, warns the voluntary certification model won’t be enough to be EUDR-ready.
“Fundamentally, the reason we need laws like the EUDR is because voluntary certification schemes have not worked,” Jacobsen told the US-based Mongabay today. “They haven’t been able to bring enough of the sector — or even really a significant amount of the sector — toward more environmentally sustainable practices.”
It comes as IKEA — a founding member of the Forest Stewardship Council — last year processed 15 million cubic metres of wood. And of that, more than 96.5 per cent was FSC-certified or recycled. But Jacobsen said voluntary certification is not the same as proof.
In early 2024, investigations into IKEA’s Romanian supply chain uncovered clear-cutting in protected areas and fraud in wood transport documentation — both involving FSC-certified timber. Crucially, it was Romania’s own government-run traceability portal, built in 2016, that caught it. Jacobsen says IKEA should be pushing governments across its sourcing regions to build exactly that kind of system — not waiting on Brussels to force the issue.
The EU Deforestation Regulation, now delayed to December 31, 2026, requires companies to submit geolocation data proving their timber was not sourced from land deforested after December 2020. A January 2026 EIA investigation found evidence of illicitly produced rainforest timber still entering multiple EU member states — a problem Jacobsen says would have been far harder to sustain had the EUDR been in force, and one that reflects why global supply chains remain so ill-equipped for what is coming.
The regulation itself remains contested policy.
A further simplification review is due next month — part of an ongoing pattern of Brussels rewriting the rules that has left companies with no clear picture of what compliance will actually cost them. Whilst last October, 29 companies — including Nestlé and agribusiness trader Olam International — wrote to Brussels urging no further delays or rewrites, warning that changes would produce “considerable uncertainty and stakeholder disengagement.” IKEA was not among the signatories.
“The changes made to the EUDR requirements could result in additional time and investment needed for our business to adapt,” an IKEA spokesperson said, declining to elaborate ahead of the April review. WWF’s forests forward global lead Tim Cronin — whose organisation has partnered with IKEA since 2002 — says the regulation’s traceability demands are worth leaning into:
“The traceability and thorough due diligence required by EUDR are a major business opportunity to manage risks and increase resilience through better knowledge of the supply chain.”
“Resilient forests make for resilient supply chains.”
Greenpeace Europe legal strategist Andrea Carta is less measured. She says Brussels has been “delusional” — demanding businesses innovate and compete while simultaneously removing the legal certainty needed to justify that investment. “That only favours irresponsible organisations and removes any incentive to innovate and improve businesses,” she said.
Jacobsen puts it simply. IKEA can do more.
- To learn more about the impact of the EUDR on the full supply chain of timber products, click here for Wood Central’s special feature.
