But the study, commissioned from the Proforest consultancy, says that four out of the 10 schemes it assesses fall short only in terms of "partial compliances" with EUTR demands, so should be accepted as sufficient proof of legality.
It also highlights that other schemes are still working towards compliance before the Regulation comes in on March 3.
Under the EUTR, companies which first place timber on the EU market, termed "operators", will have to implement due diligence risk assessment of their suppliers to minimise the danger of trading in illegal timber. Naturally the hope is that compliance with existing third-party legality assurance schemes will provide adequate proof that companies have done enough to "mitigate risk".
The report looks at the schemes of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC), BV Origin and Legality of Wood (OLB), Certisource Legality Assurance System (CLAS), GFS Wood Tracking Programme (WTP), SmartWood Verification of Legal Origin and Legal Compliance (Smartwood VLC and VLO), Soil Association Forest Verification of Legal Compliance (FVLC), SCS Legal Harvest Verification (LHV) and NEPCon LegalSource Standard (LS).
The four schemes that fall short only in terms of "partial compliance" to specific EUTR criteria and should "provide acceptable assurance and credibility" are LS, LHV, FVLC and Smartwood VLO.
Of the six with areas of "non-compliance", the FSC and PEFC both fall short in terms of trade and customs legality assurance.
Proforest also highlighted that currently non-compliant schemes are working on their shortfalls and recommended later reassessment.
ETTF secretary-general André de Boer said the report would provide "support for operators, while ensuring greater consistency in EUTR implementation".
The full reports are available at www.ettf.info.
