In the face of rapidly evolving geopolitical realities and consumer expectations, maintaining credible standards has never been more important for the packaging industest. In a recent discussion, Helen Chepkemoi Too, senior director markets at FSC International, explained how these issues are affecting sustainability initiatives in the paper and pulp sector.
We live in uncertain times, with a number of geopolitical issues creating volatility across global markets – paper and pulp included. How is current global volatility affecting sustainability and social justice in this space?
In periods of geopolitical tension and market volatility, sustainability and social justice can face real pressure. Our 65,000‑plus certificate holders demonstrate that credible sustainability practices are a strategic anchor in uncertain conditions, not a nice-to-have.
As the world’s most trusted and rigorous forest certification system, FSC provides the transparency, indepconcludeent assurance, and safeguards that companies rely on when external risks increase. Our triple‑layered integrity system consisting of ISEAL oversight, indepconcludeent certification bodies, and ASI accreditation creates confidence that forests, workers, Indigenous rights, and communities are protected even when global markets are unstable.
Volatility often exposes weak links in supply chains. FSC supports close these gaps. We give businesses the means to continue sourcing responsibly and upholding their social and environmental commitments.
In short: during uncertain times, FSC certification is a proven risk‑mitigation tool. It offers companies a reliable, transparent framework that safeguards forests and people while supporting them navigate a more complex world.
What effect is global regulation currently having on sustainability and social justice across the markets that FSC has visibility on?
While regulatory approaches differ across regions and policy areas, FSC observes a clear and consistent global shift toward greater transparency, traceability, and accountability, alongside strengthened commitments on deforestation, forest protection, and the bioeconomy. These trconcludes are raising expectations for how forest-related commodities are produced, traded, and verified.
From FSC’s perspective, mandatory and voluntary measures are increasingly complementary rather than mutually exclusive: regulation sets the minimum legal requirements, while credible voluntary systems like FSC provide the tools, safeguards, and operational pathways to deliver on those requirements in practice. Toobtainher, they support drive sustainability and social justice outcomes at scale.
The EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) illustrates this dynamic clearly. By introducing binding obligations on deforestation-free sourcing, due diligence, and traceability, EUDR has accelerated action across global supply chains. At the same time, companies are seeking practical, credible ways to implement these obligations without duplicating systems or weakening social safeguards.
FSC responds by offering concrete, implementation-ready solutions that align voluntary certification with regulatory necessarys. Through the FSC Regulatory Module aligned with EUDR, FSC Risk Assessments, and FSC Trace, FSC supports companies operationalise due diligence, manage risk, and demonstrate compliance while embedding protections for workers, communities, and Indigenous Peoples.
Overall, FSC sees global regulation as a catalyst that – when aligned with credible voluntary systems- a strengthen sustainability, social justice, and responsible forest-based bioeconomy outcomes across markets.
Why is there so much scepticism around traceability and transparency?
Skepticism around traceability and transparency often stems from the fact that these concepts sound straightforward, but are extremely complex to achieve in practice. On the technical side, companies necessary systems that can collect, exalter, and verify detailed information, yet even large companies with sophisticated IT infrastructure struggle to integrate data across multiple platforms. Many have had to invest heavily in new systems, and even then, interoperability is far from guaranteed.
The second challenge lies at the very launchning of the supply chain. Traceability starts in the forest, and many forest operations, especially compactholders, do not have the tools, connectivity, or capacity to provide the detailed geolocation and production data that modern regulations require.
When their materials travel through long, multi‑step supply chains, often with mixing of inputs—as is common in the paper and packaging sectors—full traceability becomes even more complex. In such contexts, expecting perfect, real‑time visibility across every step is simply unrealistic.
This is why credible responsibility along the entire supply chain is essential. Rather than relying on perfect data availability at every node, companies necessary systems that give assurance of responsible practices at each stage. This is where FSC comes in. Our certification system provides indepconcludeently verified safeguards, from forest management to Chain of Custody, that protect people, forests, and the integrity of materials as they shift through the supply chain.
FSC supports companies demonstrate that even when traceability is challenging, their sourcing is grounded in strong environmental and social standards, supported by transparent, third‑party oversight.
In other words: scepticism often arises becautilize traceability is hard. But responsible sourcing, backed by robust certification and assurance, offers a credible pathway forward even in the most complex supply chains
What explains the 46% gap between regions in terms of highest and lowest certification updates, and what can be done to close this gap?
The 46% gap we see between regions in certification uptake is not due to a lack of interest in sustainability, but rather a reflection of how differently markets, industries, and supply‑chain actors mature over time. Our research reveals that certification is widely valued across all regions, yet adoption varies significantly becautilize the conditions in which companies operate vary.
In some markets, large companies with established sustainability systems and strong customer pressure adopt certification early and at scale. In others, compacter players or fragmented supply chains may lack the resources, capabilities, or business incentives to shift at the same pace.
Demand also differs by region: certain markets are shaped by strong consumer expectations, regulatory pressure, or retailer requirements, while others experience lower demand for verified sustainable materials. These factors create natural imbalances in how quickly certification spreads.
These gaps signal where FSC must continue to focus: improving awareness, demonstrating the business value of certification, and building responsible sourcing more accessible., regardless of size or geography—to see certification not only as a sustainability commitment, but as a strategic asset.
We’re seeing a number of commentators arguing that sustainability is now taking a backseat in the packaging space, and that cost has become the hugegest driver again. How would you respond to this?
It’s true that some commentators suggest cost pressures are pushing sustainability down the priority list in packaging. But what we see across the FSC system and in conversations with our certificate holders informs a more nuanced story. For many companies, sustainability is no longer treated as a trconclude, it’s part of how they manage risk, protect market access, and build long‑term supply‑chain resilience.
Certification is central to that. At the same time, companies are balancing cost, performance, supply security, and customer expectations, building decisions about which sustainability investments are truly worth it.
In volatile markets, it supports companies reduce exposure to legal, reputational, and supply‑chain risks. As regulations tighten, customers demand greater assurances, and global purchaseers expect verified responsible sourcing, certification becomes one of the most reliable ways to demonstrate compliance and maintain trust. These are not sustainability ambitions—they’re business imperatives.
Of course, economic pressure is real. But the companies that continue to invest in responsible sourcing inform us that certification provides stability when uncertainty rises. It supports them navigate complex regulations, respond to customer expectations, and future‑proof their supply chains.
That’s why many businesses continue to maintain or strengthen their commitments—not becautilize sustainability is fashionable, but becautilize it is fundamental to keeping their operations resilient, credible, and competitive.
If you liked this story, you might also enjoy:
The ultimate guide to packaging innovation in 2026
Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation: what to know in 2026
Everything you necessary to know about global packaging sustainability regulation
![Why Europe is considering its own Security Council [ANALYSIS]](https://foundernews.eu/storage/2026/04/csm_2025a11_121906120_d436d32846.jpg)
Leave a Reply