2020 Analysis

of the EU
Charcoal Market
Further information:

www.facebook.com/wwfde

www.youtube.com/user/WWFDeutschland/

www.instagram.com/wwf_deutschland/

twitter.com/WWF_Deutschland

Ghostdiver app:
ghostdiver.com

Publisher WWF Germany

Date October 2020
Authors Johannes Zahnen (WWF Germany)
Peter Hirschberger (4con Forestconsulting)
Volker Haag (Thünen Institute)
Tim Lewandrowski (Thünen Institute)
Coordination: Johannes Zahnen (WWF Germany)
Contact johannes.zahnen@wwf.de
Editor Ulrike Bauer (www.ulrikebauer-pr.de)
Translation: Libby Neumann (libby@eco-accents.com)
Layout Anita Drbohlav (www.paneemadesign.com)
Cover photo iStock/Getty Images

© 2020 WWF Germany, Berlin. May only be reprinted in full or in part with the publisher’s consent.
CONTENTS
Introduction5
Why has WWF been testing charcoal for many years? 8
How charcoal makes its way to the EU 11
Dancoal case study 14
2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market  17
Germany 17
Poland  20
Switzerland 22
Spain  24
Italy  25
Norway 26
Denmark 27
Netherlands 28
Belgium 29
Czech Republic.30
Ukraine 32
WWF’s demands 34
Conclusions  37
References  38
Hot, illegal and
non-transparent.

© lukas/pexels
 Introduction
For millions of people in Europe, barbecuing during the summer months is a
popular and frequent pastime, often with traditional charcoal. But few barbe-
cue enthusiasts realise that the charcoal they use comes mostly from dubious
sources in Eastern Europe or tropical regions. In these countries, charcoal
production drives deforestation, threatens animal and plant species and fuels
global warming.

Follow the link The 2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market is a joint project between WWF

to a practical
and the Thünen Institute for Wood Research in Hamburg. At the Thünen Insti-
tute, the wood species used in charcoal can be detected using 3D-reflected light
Charcoal microscopy and in some cases, it can also provide information about the origin

Identification of the charcoal. For anyone interested in the science behind the testing, please
1 2

Video.
refer to the publications of the Thünen Institute (Haag et al and Zemke et al ).

For the market analysis, a sample of 150 bags of charcoal and charcoal bri-
quettes was tested. They were purchased between October 2019 and April
2020 in eleven European countries (Germany, Poland, Switzerland, Spain,
Italy, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Ukraine, Czech Republic and Belgium)
in retail stores, DIY stores, petrol stations or other typical places where char-
coal is sold. At least 30 wood fragments from each package were analysed to
determine the composition of the wood species they contained. This means
that a total of over 4,500 charcoal fragments were microscopically analysed.

© Thünen Institute

Comparison of the microscopic structural characteristics of the scanned 3D surface of a charcoal sample (left) with a
cross-sectional image of white oak (Quercus spp.) from the xylothek of the Thünen Institute (right).

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 5

 A market analysis of this kind casts a spotlight on the current situation. It does
not claim to capture all products in the respective country, but rather to give
a rough picture of the situation using randomly purchased products as exam-
ples. There may be products that are “better” or “worse” in each country. The
composition of the products from different batches can also vary. Nevertheless,
thousands of analysis results from 150 products have helped to make the
charcoal market more transparent.

In parallel with the laboratory analyses, the trade flows of charcoal to Europe
and within the EU were analysed on the basis of production and foreign trade
3 4
data provided by Eurostat , the European statistical authority and the FAO
statistics department. These usually supported the results of the market analy­
sis if, for example, many products made of tropical wood were identified in a
country and that country imports a lot of charcoal, for example from Nigeria.

5
The results of the current charcoal market analysis were published as a scien­
tific paper in the IAWA Journal (International Association of Wood Anatomists)
6
in September 2020, the scientific magazine nature reported on these findings.

Millions of All in all, the results cause us to sit up and take political action if forests are
to be protected from continued destructive exploitation. With a share of up
hectares of forest 7
to 30% , the illegal timber trade also contributes significantly to deforestation,
are destroyed thereby accelerating climate change and species extinction. Charcoal and many

every year other wood or paper products are still not covered by the EU Timber Regula-
tion (EUTR) and can therefore be sold in Europe without any regulation.
– many illegally. However, environmental crime and in particular illegal logging and timber
trade have now risen to third place in international crime. Organised crime
and international terrorism exploit wood as a resource and earn almost as
much money with it as they do with drugs. The enormous damage affects not
only the countries from which the timber is stolen, but also legally operating
companies. The proportion of illegal charcoal imported into the EU each year
can be estimated at the equivalent of 1.6 to six million cubic metres of wood.
Resolute political will and action is needed to counter these developments.
Environmental crime is not a minor offence, but a threat to everyone!

6
Illegal logging
in Ukraine does not
even stop at
national parks.

© André Krüger, Pieper and Partners

Illegal logging in Uzhanskyi National Park, Ukraine.

 Why has WWF been testing
charcoal for many years?
1 million tonnes Almost one million tonnes of charcoal are consumed in the European Union

of charcoal are
each year. Only a quarter of it is produced in the EU. The remaining three
quarters, just under 750,000 tonnes, are imported – most of it from countries
consumed annu- such as Ukraine, Nigeria, Russia, Indonesia or Paraguay, where corruption,

ally in the EU. illegal logging and forest destruction are widespread (Figure 1).

8
Already in 2008, WWF Germany pointed out in a study that illegally cut
timber also reaches Germany and the EU in the form of charcoal. Since the
charcoal (like many other products) 2013 – and still today! – was not covered
by the EU Timber Regulation, WWF carried out an initial market analysis. The
aim was to find out in 2017 whether potentially illegal wood is actually entering
the EU in the form of charcoal through analyses at the Thünen Institute. In
2018, WWF repeated the market analysis in Germany. Both studies confirmed
the suspicion. Since a lot of charcoal is also traded within Europe, the Thünen
Institute and WWF decided together to carry out a larger market analysis in
several European countries in 2020.
(2)

Others Ukraine
12% 20%
Bosnia-
Herzegovina
2%
Argentina
South Africa 3%
5%
Paraguay
5%

Indonesia Nigeria
7% 19%

Russia

747,990 8%

TONNES
Source: Eurostat

Namibia Cuba
IN TOTAL 10% 11%

Figure 1: Countries of origin of charcoal exports to the European Union (EU 28)

Figure 1: Countries of origin of charcoal imports into the European Union (EU 28)
 © Volker Haag/Thünen Institute
Typical charcoal pile
in Peru: sawmill residues
are first stacked, then
covered with earth and
sand and converted into
charcoal above ground.

Ukraine: In Ukraine, protected areas and Europe’s last virgin forests are
threatened by illegal logging. WWF estimates that up to one million solid
cubic metres of timber are illegally harvested annually in the Carpathian
forests alone. In some cases, illegal logging is committed by the employees
of the state forest administration themselves, who use it to supplement their
(low) salaries. Mafia-like structures support the dirty business. Corruption
9
and illegal activities span the entire supply chain, from logging to export.

10 11
Nigeria: Nigeria has a very high rate of deforestation. Corruption and
illegal logging drive the overexploitation of forests. At the same time, Nigeria
is the world’s second largest producer of charcoal, which, according to an FAO
12
report, plays a major role in deforestation. More than half of charcoal exports
from Nigeria are destined for the European Union, with Poland accounting for
the largest share. At WWF’s request, the Nigerian Ministry of Environment
confirmed in January 2018 that charcoal production in Nigeria was largely
13
illegal. According to INTERPOL, armed and terrorist groups like Al-Shabaab
14
in Africa are financed in no small measure by illegal charcoal.

Paraguay: Paraguay also suffers from a very high rate of deforestation and
destructive exploitation of forests. At the same time, corruption encourages
15,16,17,18
illegal logging. The government’s aim is to convert the country into an
intensive farming region, and in particular to increase lucrative soybean pro-
duction. The forests have to give way to make room for agriculture. The legal
situation in relation to forests is unclear: although a presidential decree issued
in 2018 permitted 100% forest conversion, it conflicted with forest law and had
to be revised. Experts still think that the legal framework is confusing and
unclear. And corruption is also a big problem here.

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 9

Every year millions of
tonnes of potentially
illegal wood enter
the EU as charcoal
– unregulated!
© lukas/pexels
 How charcoal makes its way
to the EU
The 28 countries in the EU import very different amounts of charcoal.
For example, while Germany is the largest importer of charcoal among the
EU countries, with almost 185,000 tonnes in 2019, more than half of it is
imported from other EU countries. Poland, the second largest importer of
charcoal in the EU, imports 97% from outside the EU (Figure 2).

At the same time Poland dominates trade in the EU internal market (Figure 3).
In 2019 Poland exported 137,564 tonnes of charcoal to other EU countries.
Although Poland is the largest producer of charcoal in the EU, exports exceed
the amount of charcoal produced in Poland by about one third. It would also
appear that a significant proportion of imported charcoal is exported from
Poland to other European countries.

Tonnes▼

200,000

180,000

160,000

140,000

120,000

100,000

80,000

60,000

40,000
Source: Eurostat

20,000

0
Czech Republic
Germany
Poland
France
Great Britain

Italy
Belgium

Romania

Latvia
Bulgaria
Netherlands

Greece
Spain
Portugal
Estonia
Sweden

Austria
Cyprus
Croatia
Denmark

Slovakia

Lithuania
Finland
Hungary
Slovenia
Luxembourg
Ireland
Malta

from countries outside the EU from other EU countries

Figure 2: Charcoal imports by EU countries from outside the EU

and from other EU countries (2019)

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 11

 Lithuania Others
2% 9%
Netherlands
Portugal 2%
2% Croatia
2%
France
Latvia 3%
3%
Germany Poland
8% 40%

340,946
TONNES
Belgium

Source: Eurostat
13% Spain
IN TOTAL 16%

Figure 3: Charcoal trade in the EU internal market (2019)

Tonnes ▼

250,000

200,000

Source: Eurostat Prodcom, FAOSTAT (production data in Germany and Hungary)

150,000

100,000

50,000

0
Czech Republic
Germany
Poland
France

Denmark
Great Britain
Belgium
Italy

Romania

Estonia

Slovakia
Latvia
Netherlands

Greece
Portugal
Spain

Austria
Sweden

Cyprus
Croatia

Lithuania
Bulgaria
Slovenia
Finland

Luxembourg
Ireland
Malta
Hungary

Import Export Production Consumption (estimated)

Figure 4: Production, import, export and consumption of charcoal in EU countries (2018)

12
 By comparing the figures for imports, exports, production and consumption
(Figure 4), these kinds of transit countries can be identified because imports
and exports clearly exceed production and the country’s own consumption.
Besides Poland, the main supplier is Belgium, which does not produce charcoal
itself but exports around 50,000 tonnes of charcoal annually to other European
countries. Countries such as France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom,
Italy and Greece import charcoal to meet their own consumption needs.

In Germany and Switzerland, WWF and the Thünen Institute have already
undertaken several market analyses on charcoal in recent years. Compared to
previous years, these two countries have seen an improvement. It is possible,
however, that owing to public pressure in Germany and Switzerland, there
has merely been a shift of “critical” and “non-critical” charcoal within Europe,
i.e. charcoal which potentially originates from illegal logging is sold in areas
of the European market which are not regularly monitored. The results of this
study confirm this suspicion. For example, five out of eight samples of charcoal
bought in Poland contain tropical wood. Although Poland is by far the largest
producer of charcoal in the EU, it is also the second largest importer in the EU.
A huge percentage of the charcoal imported by Poland comes from Nigeria
and is therefore of high-risk origin. Exports of charcoal, mainly to other EU
countries like Germany, far exceed the quantity produced in Poland. It would
appear that charcoal produced in Poland is mainly exported to sensitive coun-
tries such as Germany and Switzerland, while the Polish market sells consum-
ers imported tropical wood charcoal from Nigeria. This is also shown by the
case study of a Polish charcoal supplier.

© Sandra Mbanefo Obiago/WWF

Timber transport
from the Okomu Game
Reserve, Nigeria.

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 13

 Dancoal case study
The Polish company Dancoal already drew negative attention in WWF’s 2018
market analysis in Germany, when Dancoal products were found to contain an
alarmingly high share of tropical wood. This tropical wood did not come from
sustainably managed forests as declared, but from Nigeria and was most likely
illegal. In response, the discount chains Aldi and Lidl removed the controver-
sial charcoal from their product range. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC),
an international certification system for more sustainable forest management,
launched an investigation. An unannounced on-site inspection of the Dancoal
production site confirmed the suspicion that the tropical wood used in FSC
products originates from non-certified forests. Dancoal’s FSC certificate was
consequently revoked at the end of August 2018. However, the suspension was
lifted again in early 2019. According to the FSC, Dancoal had met all the re-
19,20
quirements to “demonstrate future compliance with the FSC COC rules”.

© Pieper and Partners

Charcoal production in Nigeria – according to the Nigerian Ministry of the Environment – is mostly illegal,
and the possibility that child labour is used cannot be ruled out.

14
 The 2020 market analysis did not find any charcoal made of tropical wood
from Dancoal on the German market – but instead identified three tropical
wood products each in Poland and the Czech Republic and two in Denmark.
None of these products had an FSC label. There is thus a very high risk that the
tropical wood used comes from illegal logging and forests destroyed by over­
exploitation as was already the case in 2018.

According to WWF, this violates the values of the FSC, which are set out in the
21
Policy of Association and which every FSC-certified company has committed
to uphold by signing the FSC licensing agreement. In this policy, the FSC pro-
hibits any affiliation with companies that are directly or indirectly involved in
illegal logging or trade in illegal timber or forest products. However, to be able
to terminate the FSC licence, a high risk of illegality is not sufficient, clear evi-
dence must be provided. These are by definition difficult to provide in the case
of illegal activities and a complex supply chain. On the other hand, there is an
extremely high risk that charcoal from Nigeria is from illegal logging (and that
there are even potential links between the charcoal market and international
terrorism, see section 1, page 6). WWF had already called the FSC’s atten-
tion to these obvious and extremely high risks for illegal wood and forest
destruction in its 2018 charcoal report. However, it appears that the FSC did
not investigate this case and Dancoal was quickly re-certified after paying a fine.
Legal measures
are needed to stop This example shows that in addition to voluntary certification schemes such
as the FSC, legal measures are also needed to prevent the import and trade of
the import and charcoal from illegal sources. If the existing legal regulations to monitor illegal
trade of charcoal wood imports, the EU Timber Regulation (EUTR), were also applied to char-

from illegal coal, the burden of proof would be reversed. Charcoal suppliers like Dancoal
would then have to demonstrate, as part of the due diligence process, that the
sources. imported charcoal comes from legal sources.

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 15

Germany is
the largest importer
and consumer of
charcoal in the EU.

© Dirk Maus/pixelio.de
 2020 Analysis of the
EU Charcoal Market
Germany
As part of the 2020 market analysis, 23 products available in German retail
stores, 13 of which are charcoal and ten charcoal briquettes, were tested for
the wood species they contain.

For 13 of the 23 products, no information on the wood species or origin was

found on the packaging. Of the ten products that provided information on the
wood species, six were insufficient or incorrect. Only in two cases were the
species and origin of wood completely and correctly declared. Only the five
products declared as being made of “beech” or “beechwood” (which generally
stands for good quality for barbecue enthusiasts) all showed minor or major
discrepancies from the declaration.

Tropical wood was found in six of the 23 products. The wood species used
were declared on the packaging of only one of them. In the case of an FSC-
certified product, there were mismatches with regard to the wood species
declared in the FSC database. A total of five of the tropical wood products were
awarded the FSC label, one did not have any certification at all. In WWF’s view
this product as at high risk for overexploitation and illegal logging.

Of the 23 products tested, 15 were certified under FSC standards, two under
PEFC standards and one by Naturland.

No information on For the two PEFC-certified products from a German manufacturer, the infor-

wood species or mation on the wood species provided on the packaging was incomplete and
was not consistent with the information on the PEFC website. In addition to
origin for more than the declared beech, the wood species oak and elm were also found in the char-
half the products. coal. It was not possible to determine which genus of the elm species it was.
The possibility can therefore not be ruled out that wood from elms was used.
However, this tree species has already been severely decimated in Europe by
Dutch elm disease, which is caused by fungi. Currently, the use of wood from
elms can only be justified if the tree is already dying due to fungal decay. How-
ever, since the product was declared a beechwood product, the concern is that
the elm wood did not enter the processing chain in a regulated way.

One of the products without a certificate contained coconut shells, as confirmed

by the microscopic analysis. The use of waste products such as coconut shells
could be an environmentally friendly alternative to wood. However, the risk
remains high that forests were cleared and converted into coconut plantations
for this purpose as well. A certificate could provide certainty in this case.

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 17

 In the EU, Germany is the country with the highest consumption of charcoal
by far, but also the largest importer of charcoal. Over one third of imported
charcoal comes from Poland (Figure 5). However, trade data does not spe­-
cify whether this charcoal was actually produced in Poland or whether it was
previously imported into Poland from Africa or Eastern Europe. As shown
on page 20, Poland imports and exports much more charcoal than is pro-
duced in the country itself.

Germany imports most of the remaining charcoal directly from countries such
as Namibia, Ukraine, Paraguay, Indonesia, Brazil, Bosnia-Herzegovina and
Nigeria. Corruption, illegal logging and forest destruction are widespread in
all these countries. One positive exception is a bush control project in Namibia,
supported by the German government, which turns bushes of invasive species
22
into charcoal and thus makes pasture land accessible again.

To generally minimise the risk of illegal wood use and destructive exploitation,
WWF believes that charcoal should have a credible certification, e.g. according
to FSC or Naturland guidelines.

184,255
Others
13%

TONNES
Bosnia-
Nigeria
3%
IN TOTAL
Herzegovina
3%
Brazi
4%
Indonesia Poland
5% 37%
Paraguay
7%

Spain
7%
Source: Eurostat

Ukraine Namibia
10% 10%

Figure 5: Countries of origin of German imports of charcoal (2019)

18
Some companies that had already been shown in a negative light in the 2017
and 2018 once again stood out in the 2020 charcoal study:

Gryfskand
• 2017: p
 roduct was declared to contain “100% beech”. The laboratory also
identified white oak and maple. There was also a mismatch in the wood
species (maple) approved in the FSC database.
• 2018: p
 roduct pledges to be “100% beechwood” - but also has birch (50%)
and white oak (36%).
• 2020: d eclaration “Beech charcoal”. Maple, ash and oak were also found in
relevant quantities. This result is extremely frustrating for WWF, as
these FSC-certified brand-name products carry the Panda logo and
comparable discrepancies had already occurred in 2017 and 2018
(see demands of the FSC). In addition, there were mismatches in one
product in Denmark for Gryfskand.

Boomex
• 2017: a
 product is declared to have “no tropical wood” – but the product
contains tropical wood.
• 2018: w
 hen asked, Boomex claims that the product consists of “85% beech”
– only birch and white oak are found.
• 2020: t his year again the information about the wood species declared on the
packaging of a Boomex product was almost completely inaccurate.

proFagus
• 2017: p
 roduct is declared as “beech”, but the laboratory also detects lime and
maple.
• 2018: t ropical wood species were identified in the non-FSC-certified product
“Grill-Country”.
• 2020: i n the PEFC-certified charcoal, there were small quantities of oak in
addition to the beech declared. The PEFC-certified charcoal briquettes
contained small quantities of elm in addition to the declared beech,
which is problematic from WWF’s point of view (see page 17).

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 19

 Poland
Eight different products were purchased and tested in Poland, five products
were charcoal and three charcoal briquettes. Tropical wood was found in five
products. Only one of these products was FSC certified, although the scope of
certification also includes the tropical wood species identified. There is a very
high risk that the tropical wood used in the other four products comes from
illegal logging and has contributed to forest destruction. The wood species was
not indicated on the packaging of any of the products purchased in Poland.

The high percentage of tropical wood in the sample from Poland may be sur-
prising at first glance; after all, Poland is the largest producer of charcoal in
the EU. As Figure 6 shows, after a steady increase in previous years, charcoal
production in Poland fell by 20% between 2014 and 2018. At the same time,
charcoal imports increased by 75% and exports by 53% during this period. Im-
ports and exports now far exceed the production and consumption of charcoal
in Poland.

Poland’s imports have almost tripled in the ten years between 2009 and 2018,
from nearly 60,000 tonnes to 170,000 tonnes of charcoal, almost all of it from
“critical” countries of origin.

Tonnes▼

200,000

180,000

160,000

140,000

120,000

100,000

80,000

60,000

40,000
Source: Eurostat

20,000

0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Export Import Production Consumption (estimated)

Figure 6: Development of production, import, export and consumption of charcoal

in Poland between 2009 and 2018

20
 Almost half of the charcoal imported by Poland in 2019 came from Ukraine,
another third from Nigeria (Figure 7). Other countries of origin like Russia and
Belarus must also be viewed critically with regard to legality and sustainability
in forest management.

The results of the market analysis indicate that some of the charcoal imported

Poland imports by Poland is sold on the domestic market and some is exported to less sensitive
consumer countries. By contrast, the charcoal produced in Poland is exported
a lot of charcoal to sensitive countries such as Germany and Switzerland. This kind of shift can
from non-EU be prevented if public pressure also increased in other European countries and

countries for its the import of charcoal were legally monitored under the EUTR, so that proof of
the legal origin of the wood would at least have to be provided.
own market.
It appears that charcoal produced in Poland is exported, while imported trop-
ical charcoal is sold to consumers on the Polish market. This is also shown by
the case study of the Polish charcoal supplier Dancoal (see page 14).

Others
7% 140,929
Namibia TONNES
Belarus
4% IN TOTAL
4%
Russia
6%

Ukraine
46%
Nigeria
33%
Source: Eurostat

Figure 7: Countries of origin of Polish imports of charcoal (2019)

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 21

 Switzerland
In Switzerland, 13 charcoal products were bought and tested.

The high proportion of FSC-certified products in Switzerland is encouraging:

nine of the 13 products were FSC certified. In the case of five FSC products,
however, the declaration regarding the wood species was incomplete at the
The wood species point of sale, and there were additional discrepancies with the wood species

and origin must declared in the FSC database for one product. For another FSC-certified prod-

be declared in uct from a German manufacturer, no wood species was indicated at the point
of sale. According to the Swiss Ordinance on the Declaration for Timber and
Switzerland. Timber Products (SR 944.012), these product declarations are not permitted.

Incorrect declaration on packaging or at the point of sale shows that compli-

ance with the provisions of the Swiss Ordinance on the Declaration for Timber
23
and Timber Products need to be improved. Companies that supply products
requiring declarations to consumers must comply with the following rules for
charcoal products:

In the case of charcoal products consisting of one to three species of wood, all
wood used is to be declared with the corresponding countries of origin.

Others
7%
France
4%
Portugal Poland
4% 33%
Spain
6%
Ukraine
7%
Source: Swiss Federal Customs Administration

South Africa
7%
Germany

11,348 14%

TONNES Bosnia-
Herzegovina Namibia
IN TOTAL 8% 10%

Figure 8: Countries of origin of Swiss imports of charcoal (2019)

22
 © Tim Brunauer/GIZ
FSC-certified charcoal from Namibia is not only good for barbecuing, it also helps people and animals at the same
time, as thorny bushes of invasive species are removed and converted. Grazing land becomes accessible again.

If more than three species of wood are used for charcoal production, the
charcoal products are to include the declaration “various wood species”.
In addition, at least three of the wood species used are to be declared with
the respective countries of origin.

Two of the 13 charcoal products tested contained tropical wood, neither was
certified. One of these two products (Golden Grill Special Barbecue) even
advertises with the statement “No Tropical Wood” on the packaging, which
could be considered a violation of the law on unfair competition.

Switzerland imports a third of its charcoal from Poland. The second most
important country of origin is Germany, from which Switzerland imports one
seventh of its charcoal. However, the trade figures do not indicate whether
the charcoal was actually produced in these countries or whether it was
previously imported from other, possibly “critical” countries. Switzerland
also imports charcoal directly from countries like Bosnia-Herzegovina and
Ukraine, which are critical in terms of the legality and the sustainability of
forest management.

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 23

 Spain
Twelve charcoal products were purchased and tested in Spain. Information
on the wood species used was provided for only one product. One product
(excluding tropical wood) had an FSC certificate, but it did not include all the
wood species found in the samples tested. In addition, one product featured
the FSC logo without a mandatory licence number, so that there is a suspicion
of logo misuse. This product also contained tropical wood.

Overall, tropical wood was found in eight out of twelve, or two thirds, of the
charcoal products tested. None of these products had FSC certification. Again,
the high proportion of imported tropical charcoal seems surprising, as Spain
is the second largest producer of charcoal in the EU, accounting for about one
third more charcoal than is consumed in the country itself.

Spain mainly imports charcoal from Spanish-speaking countries such as Cuba,

24,25
Paraguay and Venezuela. The two South American countries and Nigeria

Low as another country of origin must be viewed critically with regard to legality

transparency and forest destruction. From WWF’s point of view, at least nine of the twelve
products tested in Spain pose a high risk of illegal logging and destructive
– high risk. exploitation.

Others
16%

Venezuela
5%

Nigeria Cuba
8% 43%

Portugal

49,301
11%

TONNES
Source: Eurostat

Paraguay
IN TOTAL 16%

Figure 9: Countries of origin of Spanish imports of charcoal (2019)

24
 Italy
Only one product In consumer markets in Italy, 23 charcoal products were bought and tested for

with a correct
the wood species they contained. The wood species were only indicated on the
packaging of two products, but for one of them the information was incomplete.
declaration on the
packaging. In 15 of the 23 products tested, i.e. 65%, tropical wood was found. Only three
of these tropical wood products were FSC certified. However, the FSC certifi-
26
cate of the charcoal retailer Fochista, which is the source of all three FSC-
certified products, only includes the domestic wood species hornbeam, beech
and oak, but no tropical wood. All 15 tropical wood products must therefore
be classified as high risk in terms of illegal timber and overexploitation.

In total, six of the 23 charcoal products were FSC certified, five of which came
from Fochista. In another, tropical wood-free product of this charcoal supplier,
elm was also found, a wood species not covered by the FSC certificate. In WWF’s
perspective, the use of elm should be viewed critically anyway (see page 17).

Italy is the biggest purchaser of charcoal from Argentina and Croatia in the
EU. For instance, 71% of all EU charcoal imports from Argentina and as much
as 99% of EU imports from Croatia are destined for Italy. A fifth of Italy’s
charcoal imports come from Nigeria and are therefore very likely to be illegally
logged. The imported charcoal is consumed almost entirely in Italy itself.
Exports are minimal. No charcoal is produced in Italy.

Bosnia- Others Argentina

Herzegovina 10% 23%
3%
Paraguay
5%
Venezuela
7%

Nigeria
Croatia
20%
12%

64,210
TONNES
Source: Eurostat

Cuba
IN TOTAL 19%

Figure 10: Countries of origin of Italian imports of charcoal (2019)

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 25

 Norway
Seven products were purchased in Norway and tested for the wood species
they contained. The wood species used were not indicated on the packaging of
any of the products tested. Only one product contained tropical wood, but this
was FSC certified.

In total, six of the seven charcoal products analysed had an FSC certificate.

Norway imports almost two thirds of its charcoal from Indonesia and another
third from Poland. Other countries such as South Africa, Sweden or Namibia
95% of each account for 1% or less of charcoal imports (Figure 11). Since the coun-

imports come tries of origin of the charcoal are quite high risk, FSC certification has an

from Indonesia
important role to play. The lack of transparency is unfortunate, as customers
cannot find out anything about the origin or composition of the product on the
and Poland. packaging.

40,050
Others
6%

TONNES
IN TOTAL

Source: Norwegian Central Bureau of Statistics

Indonesia
Poland 60%
35%

Figure 11: Countries of origin of Norwegian imports of charcoal (2019)

26
 Denmark
In Denmark, 17 charcoal products were bought and tested, four of which were
FSC certified.

The wood species were indicated on the packaging of only four of the products
analysed, two of which were coconut. For the other two products, both FSC
certified, the information on the packaging was not complete. This concerns a
product of the Polish manufacturer Gryfskand (see page 19) and a product of
the German manufacturer DHG, where tropical wood was found instead of the
declared oak and eucalyptus.

Tropical wood In total, tropical wood was found in six of the products tested, including two

was found in products from the Polish wholesaler Dancoal (see page 14). Denmark imports
half of its charcoal from Poland and another third from Indonesia (Figure 12).
six products Since the countries of origin of the charcoal are quite high risk, FSC certifica-

analysed. tion has an important role to play. However, in contrast to Norway, there were
significantly fewer products with this certificate in Denmark. Here too, poor
transparency is unfortunate, as customers can only find out about the origin
or composition of the goods on the packaging for a very small number of
products.

Ukraine Others
Great 3% 4%
Britain
4% Germany
4%

Indonesia Poland

11,708
35% 50%

TONNES
Source: Eurostat

IN TOTAL
Figure 12: Countries of origin of Danish imports of charcoal (2019)

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 27

 Netherlands
Seven products were purchased and tested in the Netherlands, three were FSC
certified. The wood species were indicated on the packaging of three products,
including coconut for one product, as confirmed by the results of the scientific
test.

Wood species For two FSC products, both sold under the brand name Weber and, according

from Europe
to the FSC licence number, supplied by the Polish company Grill-Impex,
the information on the wood species was incomplete. In this case, not only
were advertised European wood species (partially undeclared), but also coconut and wood from

on the packaging the (sub-)tropics were identified in the product. At the time of the analysis,

– but tropical wood

no wood species were stored for Grill Impex in the FSC database.

also found in The Netherlands imports charcoal from a variety of countries, including In-

the products. donesia, Ukraine, African countries such as Namibia and Nigeria, but also
from other European Union member states like Spain, Poland and Belgium.
In many of these countries, there are risks of destructive exploitation and ille-
gality. It is therefore unfortunate that only some of the products had declared
species or origins and information for two of the products with declarations
was incomplete.

Others Namibia
15% 18%

Germany
4%
South Africa
5%
Indonesia
Ukraine
12%
5%
Nigeria
6% Spain

86,758
10%
USA
7%
TONNES
Source: Eurostat

Belgium Poland
IN TOTAL 9% 9%

Figure 13: Countries of origin of Dutch imports of charcoal (2019)

28
 Belgium
Eleven products were purchased and tested in Belgium, four of them FSC cer-
tified and one PEFC certified. The wood species were indicated on the packag-
ing of three products, all FSC certified, and corresponded to the results of the
analysis. With the exception of the PEFC-certified product, all tested products
contained tropical wood. Six of the ten tropical wood products had no certifi-
cation and were therefore considered to be at high risk of illegal logging and
overexploitation.

Based on foreign trade data, Belgium can be identified as what is known as a

transit country. It exported almost 50,000 tonnes of charcoal in 2018, making
it the third largest exporter in the EU after Poland and Spain. However, in Bel-
gium itself no charcoal is produced. Instead, Belgium imported nearly 70,000
tonnes of charcoal in the same year (see Figure 4). Only 30% of this volume
was for its own consumption, while 70% was exported to other countries.

Belgium barbe- Belgium imports more than three quarters of its charcoal from countries

cues mainly with which are critical in terms of legality and the sustainability of forest use, with
Ukraine accounting for about one third and Nigeria and Indonesia for more
tropical wood. than 10% each.

61,805
Others
11%

Paraguay TONNES
Spain
2% IN TOTAL
3% Netherlands
5%
Ukraine
Poland 33%
5%

Indonesia
11%
Source: Eurostat

Nigeria Namibia
12% 18%

Figure 14: Countries of origin of Belgian imports of charcoal (2019)

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 29

 Czech Republic
A total of 14 charcoal products were purchased in retail stores in the Czech Re-
public and were tested for the wood species they contained. The wood species
were only listed on the packaging of two products, both with FSC certification.
However, the information was incomplete. These are products from the Polish
company Grill-Impex, sold under the brand name Weber, which were already
highlighted in the analysis of products from the Netherlands. In the case of the
Weber briquettes, (sub-)tropical wood as well as coconut and coniferous wood
that were not declared on the packaging were once again found.

A total of nine of the 14 products analysed, i.e. almost two thirds, were found to
contain tropical wood. Only one of the tropical wood products, the Weber bri-
quettes, had FSC certification. In this case, however, an inadequate declaration
on the packaging must be seen critically. Furthermore, at the time of the analy-
sis no wood species were entered in the FSC database.

For the other eight tropical wood products, there is therefore a high risk of
illegality and forest destruction. These include three products from the Polish
charcoal wholesaler Dancoal, which contain tropical wood and are not FSC
certified. For WWF, this means that Dancoal accepts that this charcoal might
come from illegal sources and thus, in WWF’s view, violates the principles of
4
cooperation with the FSC (see page 14).

Others
11%
Indonesia
6%
Slovakia Ukraine
7% 30%

Germany
23%

11,562
TONNES
Source: Eurostat

Poland
IN TOTAL 23%

Figure 15: Countries of origin of Czech imports of charcoal (2019)

30
 © Pieper und Partner
Illegal logging in a beech forest in Uzhanskyi National Park in Ukraine. Beech is a preferred wood for charcoal.

The Czech Republic imports almost a third of its charcoal from Ukraine and al-
most a quarter each from Poland and Germany. The high proportion of tropi-
cal wood in the Czech samples is therefore surprising at first glance, but makes
it clear that at least the charcoal imported from Poland and Germany does not
necessarily come from these countries, but may have previously been import-
ed from other, tropical countries such as Nigeria, Indonesia or Paraguay.

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 31

 Ukraine
In Ukraine, 13 charcoal products were bought and tested. None of the prod-
ucts had FSC or PEFC certification. The wood species were only indicated on
the packaging of two products. In both cases, however, the information was
incomplete, as birch and elm were found in addition to the declared species of
oak, beech and hornbeam. Tropical wood was not found in any of the Ukraini-
an products.

Ukraine remains The result of the market analysis is also confirmed by the statistical data on

a risk country
charcoal production and foreign trade. According to FAO data, Ukraine im-
ported only an insignificant quantity of 2,000 tonnes of charcoal in 2018, while
for timber and the country produced 185,000 tonnes. A fraction of the quantity produced is

timber products. sufficient to meet national demand. 93% of Ukrainian charcoal is exported,
mainly to EU member states such as Poland, Germany, Romania and Belgium.
Based on the market analyses of previous years, the FSC conducted extra
audits and suspended a large number of charcoal companies in Ukraine that
had violated FSC rules. A study carried out by the environmental organisation
27
Earthsight also highlights massive problems with legality. Ukraine therefore
remains a risk country for timber and timber products.

174,388
Others
7%

TONNES
Irac
1%
Czech
Republic
IN TOTAL
France 2%
3% Bulgaria
3%
Netherlands
3%

Poland
Belgium 39%
10%
Source: UN Comtrade

Romania
Germany
14%
18%

Figure 16: Sales markets of Ukrainian exports of charcoal (2018)

32
Forests are the ideal
partners for climate
change mitigation and
species protection.

© Ralph Frank/WWF
 WWF’s demands
WWF’s demands of policymakers

»» Internationally, environmental crime is the third largest area of crime after

counterfeiting and drug trafficking, where organised crime has become very
widespread. The charcoal study provides examples of illegal products that
can also be found in Germany. Environmental crime must be taken more
seriously. Sufficient personnel and resources are needed to combat environ-
mental crime effectively. From WWF’s point of view (in Germany), there is a
lot of room for improvement.

In the EU, many »» The EU Timber Regulation (EUTR) only covers some timber and paper pro-
ducts so far. As a result, relevant parts of the market remain unregulated in
timber products terms of legality. This report uses charcoal as an example to show why legal
are not checked regulation and monitoring is important. For this reason, the WWF calls for

for legality. all timber and timber-based products to be included in the annex of the EU-
TR for charcoal and beyond, and for more effective implementation in the
member countries.

»» The penalties for violations of the EUTR must act as a deterrent, as required
by the Regulation. They have not until now.

»» In August 2019, at the initiative of the federal state of Saarland, the Bundes-
rat unanimously decided that the German government should restrict trade
in charcoal from illegal sources. This was triggered by the market analyses
conducted by WWF and the Thünen Institute (Haag et al. 2017 … womit
28 29
grillen wir eigentlich) and “TEST” . What has happened since then?

WWF’s demands of the FSC

The FSC has the potential to positively influence forest management with its
certificates. But change can only be achieved in practice through strong con-
trols. WWF’s market research has repeatedly shown that there can also be
negligence or even active misconduct among FSC-certified companies and FSC
certifiers.

That is why the WWF calls on the FSC to:

»» Immediately start investigations on its own initiative into suspected cases

concerning the Policy for Association (PfA). In its 2018 charcoal report,
WWF had pointed out that some FSC-certified companies have, in parallel to
FSC-certified products, sold charcoal which WWF believes most likely origi-
nates from forests destroyed by overexploitation in violation of the FSC’s PfA.
FSC did not do enough to follow WWF’s advice and, for example, re-certified

34
 the company Dancoal after a brief period. The 2020 market analysis has
Voluntary again identified many Dancoal tropical wood products without FSC certifica-

certificates tion, possibly from forests destroyed by overexploitation and illegal sources.

such as FSC »»Auditors should have the mandate and obligation to actively review the PfA
must be better. during their audits.

»» The FSC must ensure greater transparency and reliability in the chain of
custody to stop criminal activities and illegal timber. There are regular
discrepancies between the wood species listed in the FSC database approved
for a particular product group and the results of laboratory tests. Conversely,
entering a maximum number of wood species in the FSC database does not
contribute to transparency. Through this practice the FSC database loses its
meaning.

»» The FSC should work on answers to the question of the “conflict of interest”
between certifiers and companies.

»» Strengthening of the FSC control structures (Accreditation Services Interna-

tional ASI and the FSC internal fibre testing programme)

WWF’s demands of companies operating in the charcoal segment

»» More transparency: information on wood species and origin should be com-

Much more municated on the packaging so that consumers can make an informed choice.
transparency If there is nothing to hide, then the bag of charcoal can simply include a label

is needed. with information about the contents and where the wood comes from!

»» Charcoal from high-risk countries such as Nigeria, Paraguay or Ukraine

should never be sold – unless the product is at least FSC certified.

»» Overall, there needs to be a shift to FSC-certified products, as they are still

the most reliable in the absence of a legal framework to determine legality.

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 35

Environmental crime
robs forests and people
of their future!

© Sandra Mbanefo Obiago/WWF

 Conclusions
Charcoal Despite years of market analysis and indications that there are many charcoal

encourages products on the market which probably originate from illegal forest destruc-

illegal destruction tion, not much has happened so far across Europe. In Germany and Switzer-
land, there are slightly fewer high-risk goods, but the proportion in other
of forests. European countries is in some cases alarmingly high.

If the proportion of high-risk charcoal (from Ukraine, Nigeria, Paraguay) im-

ported only to the EU is converted into wood equivalents, it must be assumed
that 1.6 to six million cubic metres of potentially illegal wood enters the EU
each year in the form of charcoal alone (6 million m³ corresponds to 9% of
annual logging in Germany).

The example of charcoal shows that unregulated markets are predominantly

geared to the lowest price and that legality or sustainability are only consid-
ered to a limited extent.

Environmental crime has grown significantly at international level in recent

years. Policymakers must acknowledge this fact and undertake measures to
counteract it. This includes strengthening the EUTR and its effective imple-
30
mentation in the EU member states.

Environmental Environmental crime is not a minor offence, but contributes to deforestation,

crime is not global warming and species loss. Policymakers must act quickly and push for
effective measures to eliminate illegal logging and overexploitation, otherwise
a minor offence. there will be no future for forests.

2020 Analysis of the EU Charcoal Market | 37

References
1 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344283401_The_European_charcoal_trade
(Haag V, Zemke V, Lewandrowski TL, Zahnen J, Hirschberger P, Bick U, Koch G (2020) The European
charcoal trade. IAWA J:in Press, DOI:10.1163/22941932-bja10017)
2 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344248131_Wood_identification_of_charcoal_with_3D-reflected_
light_microscopy (Zemke V, Haag V, Koch G (2020) Wood identification of charcoal with 3D-reflected light
microscopy. IAWA J:in Press, DOI:10.1163/22941932-bja10033)
3 https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/de/data/database
4 http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/FO
5 https://www.iawa-website.org/en/News/article_155.shtml
6 “Microscopy illuminates charcoal’s sketchy origins”; https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02672-z
7 World Atlas of Illicit Flows; Interpol, Rhipto, Global Initiative against Transnational Organized Crime; 2020
8 “Illegaler Holzeinschlag und Deutschland – Eine Analyse der Außenhandelsdaten”; April 2008
9 UN WCMC; 2019: Ukraine – Länderübersicht zur Unterstützung der EU-TR https://www.ble.de/SharedDocs/
Downloads/DE/Wald-Holz/Laenderuebersicht_Ukraine.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2
10 http://www.countrydiffer.com/which-country-has-the-worlds-highest-deforestation-rate/
11 2019 ranked 146 of 198 in the Corruption Index: https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi
12 FAO; 2017: The charcoal transition http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6935e.pdf
13 Das schmutzige Geschäft mit der Grillkohle; WWF; 2018
14 World Atlas of Illicit Flows; Interpol, Rhipto, Global Initiative against Transnational Organized Crime; 2020
15 Choice Cuts: how European & US BBQs are fuelled by a hidden deforestation crisis in South America;
Earthsight; 2017
16 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/andes-to-the-amazon/2017/sep/01/will-european-
supermarkets-act-over-paraguay-forest-destruction
17 https://newint.org/columns/country/2018-03-27/country-profile-paraguay
18 https://www.deutschlandfunknova.de/nachrichten/urwald-in-paraguay-baeume-faellen-
fuer-unsere-grill-wuerstchen
19 FSC Germany; 20.12.2018: Update of the Supply Chain Integrity Program https://www.fsc-deutschland.de/
de-de/aktuelles/technische-news/id/406
20 COC: Chain of Custody
21 Forest Stewardship Council; 2011: Policy for the Association of Organizations with FSC FSC-POL-01-004 V2-0
EN https://fsc.org/en/document-centre/documents/resource/368
22 German: https://www.giz.de/de/weltweit/28648.html; English: https://www.giz.de/en/worldwide/28648.html
23 https://www.admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/20092250/index.html
24 In 2019 Venezuela ranked 173 out of 198, making it one of the most corrupt countries:
https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi
25 In the period 1990 to 2019, total forest loss was 11%; the rate is declining – but still amounts to 90,000 ha/a:
https://fra-data.fao.org/VEN/assessment/fra2020/extentOfForest/
26 FSC database from 26.9.2020: https://info.fsc.org/details.php?id=a0240000007ThgHAAS&type=
certificate#result • Haag V, Koch G, Kaschuro S (2017) Womit grillen wir da eigentlich? Wissenschaftliche
Untersuchungen zeigen, dass viele Chargen zumindest fehlerhaft deklariert sind.
Holz Zentralbl 143(38):876 PDF document (file does not meet accessibility standards) 5375 KB
27 https://www.earthsight.org.uk/investigations/complicit-in-corruption
28 https://literatur.thuenen.de/digbib_extern/dn059133.pdf
29 https://www.test.de/Grillkohle-CSR-Test-5474364-0/
30 http://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/wwf_eutr_implementation_eu_synthesis_report_2019.pdf

38
Support WWF
IBAN: DE06 5502 0500 0222 2222 22

© 1986 Panda symbol WWF – World Wide Fund For Nature (Formerly World Wildlife Fund) • ® “WWF” is a WWF Registered Trademark. • Date: 10/20

WWF Germany
Why we are here Reinhardtstr. 18 | 10117 Berlin | Germany
To stop the degradation of the planet’s natural environment and Tel.: +49 30 311 777-700
to build a future in which humans live in harmony with nature. info@wwf.de | wwf.de