Skip to content
Menu Search

Société Internationale de Plantations d'Hévéas (SIPH)

Natural rubber assessment
  • Latest update: March 2022
  • Next scheduled: March 2023

Show ESG scores Show supply chain scores Modify score weighting

Company assessment: Société Internationale de Plantations d'Hévéas (SIPH) – March 2022

Assessment date:

Score by disclosure type:

Total: 67% 109.25 / 163
  • Organisation: 26.5 / 37 71.6%
  • Policy: 64.5 / 76 84.9%
  • Practice: 18.3 / 50 36.5%
  • Self-reported: 13.3 / 50 26.5%
  • External: 5 / 50 10%
  • Sustainability policy and leadership Sustainability policy and leadership
    8.25 / 11 75%
    • Organisation: 5 / 6 83.3%
    • Policy: 2 / 2 100%
    • Practice: 1.3 / 3 41.7%
    • Self-reported: 1.3 / 3 41.7%
    • External: 0 / 3 0%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      1. Sustainable natural rubber policy or commitment for all its operations?

      The company has published a sustainable natural rubber policy which covers all rubber operations.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      2. Sustainable natural rubber policy or commitment applies to all suppliers?

      The company has published a sustainable natural rubber policy which applies to all suppliers.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      3. High-level position of responsibility for sustainability?

      Sustainable Development Manager.

    • N
      0 / 1

      4. One or more members within the board of the company have responsibility for sustainability?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      5. Percentage or number of women in senior management team?

      33 (15%) - The company reports 33 women executives out of a total of 219 for the year 2020.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      6. Percentage or number of women board members?

      3 - The company had three female board members in 2020.

    • N
      0 / 1

      7. Member of multiple industry schemes or other external initiatives to reduce negative environmental or social outcomes associated with natural rubber production?

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      8. Collaboration with stakeholders to reduce negative environmental or social outcomes associated with natural rubber production?

      The company is in collaboration with a consultancy to develop a method of calculating the carbon footprint of rubber production activities. Additionally, the company uses Rubberway (a mobile application developed by industry stakeholders) to assess the sustainability risk of its supply chain. All evidence is over two years old, therefore full points cannot be awarded.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      9. Sustainability report published within last two years?

      The company's latest CSR report which covers sustainability was published in 2020.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      10. Reports through standardised reporting systems?

      The company's most recent CSR report was written in accordance with GRI standards.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      11. Climate risks assessment available?

      The company reports a climate risk assessment, however, information is not externally verified.

  • Landbank, maps and traceability Landbank, maps and traceability
    10.5 / 18 58.3%
    • Organisation: 9.5 / 15 63.3%
    • Policy: 1 / 1 100%
    • Practice: 0 / 2 0%
    • Self-reported: 0 / 2 0%
    • External: 0 / 2 0%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      12. Lists countries and operations?

      Plantations and processing facilities exist in Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria, Liberia.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      13. Lists countries sourcing from?

      The company reports that it sources from C�te d'Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria, and Liberia.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      14. Total land area managed/controlled for natural rubber (ha)?

      60,478 - Figure reported for 2020.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      15. Total natural rubber planted area (ha)?

      59,714 - Figure reported for 2020.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      16. Scheme smallholders/outgrowers planted area (ha)?

      285,817 - The company reports 255,662 ha for SAPH and 30,155 ha for GREL.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      17. Unplanted area (areas designated for future planting) (ha)?

      764 - Figure for 2020.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      18. Conservation set-aside area, including HCV area (ha)?

      3,427.17 - The company reports a total of 3,427.15 ha of protected area across its four subsidiaries in 2020.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      19. Maps of estates/management units?

      An undated map with no coordinates is available for all estates. Maps with coordinates and clear boundaries are available for two concessions under the control of a subsidiary, however they are over five years old.

    • N
      0 / 1

      20. Management plans for natural rubber production are available for all estates/management units?

    • N
      0 / 1

      21. Monitoring of management plan implementation available for all estates/management units?

    • N
      0 / 1

      22. Maps of scheme/outgrower smallholders?

    • 23. Names and locations of all third-party supplying industrial estates/management units?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • N
      0 / 1

      24. List of jurisdictions where sourcing from smallholders?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      25. Number of company owned natural rubber processing facilities?

      10 - The company reports that it owns 9 operational factories, a tenth is under construction.

    • N
      0 / 1

      26. Names and locations of company owned natural rubber processing facilities?

      An undated map is available, it does not display the names of all 10 factories.

    • N
      0 / 1

      27. Number (or percentage) of company-owned processing facilities that source from company-owned operations and/or third parties?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      28. Reports total volumes (or percentages) sourced by company-owned processing facilities that come from company's own operations and/or third-parties?

      25% - The company states its own production reached 75,000 Tons in 2020 stating that 25% comes from own plantations, vs 75% from local farmers.

    • 29. Number of third party supplying processing facilities?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • 30. Names and locations of all third party supplying processing facilities?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • 31. Number (or percentage) of third party supplying processing facilities that source from their own plantations and/or third party plantations?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • 32. Reports total volume (or percentages) sourced from third-party supplying processing facilities that come from the supplying facilities' own operations and/or third parties?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • 33. Total volume (or percentage) sourced for manufacturing that comes from intermediary traders rather than directly from processing facilities?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • 34. Time-bound commitment to achieve 100% traceability to processing facility level?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • 35. Percentage of supply traceable to processing facility level?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • 36. Time-bound commitment to achieve 100% traceability to industrial plantation level?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • 37. Percentage of supply from own processing facilities traceable to industrial plantation level?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • 38. Percentage of supply from third-party processing facilities traceable to industrial plantation level?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      39. Time-bound commitment to achieve 100% traceability to jurisdictional level for smallholders?

      The company commits to achieve 100% traceability of its natural rubber suppliers by 2022.

    • N
      0 / 1

      40. Percentage of supply from own processing facilities traceable to smallholder at jurisdictional level?

      The company states that all third party suppliers are tracked via GPS, but doesn't state if they are traceable to plantation level. The company reports it has not yet reached a full traceability so the information available is unclear.

    • 41. Percentage of supply from third party processing facilities traceable to smallholders at jurisdictional level?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

  • Certification standards/Sustainability initiatives Certification standards/Sustainability initiatives
    4.75 / 10 47.5%
    • Organisation: 1 / 1 100%
    • Policy: 2 / 3 66.7%
    • Practice: 1.8 / 6 29.2%
    • Self-reported: 0 / 6 0%
    • External: 1.8 / 6 29.2%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      42. Member of the Global Platform for Sustainable Natural Rubber (GPSNR)?

      [Externally verified] The company is a member of GPSNR. This has been verified via the GPSNR website.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      43. Submitted self-declaration form for the Sustainable Natural Rubber Initiative (SNR-i)?

      The company has submitted a self-declaration form for SNR-i.

    • N
      0 / 1

      44. Percentage area (ha) FSC certified?

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      45. Time-bound plan for achieving FSC FM certification of estates/management units?

      The company states an unclear commitment to "achieving FSC FM certification of estates within 3 years" of 2021. It is unclear if this is some or all of the company's estates/management units, hence partial scoring.

    • N
      0 / 1

      46. Percentage of scheme/outgrower smallholders (ha) FSC-certified?

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      47. Time-bound plan for achieving FSC certification of scheme/outgrower smallholders?

      The company states an unclear commitment to "achieving FSC certification of scheme, outgrower within 3 years". It is unclear if this is some or all scheme/outgrower smallholders, hence partial scoring.

    • N
      0 / 1

      48. Percentage of natural rubber supply (tonnes) from independent smallholders/outgrowers/third-party natural rubber suppliers that is FSC-certified?

    • N
      0 / 1

      49. Percentage of all natural rubber products handled/traded/processed (tonnes) that is FSC-certified?

    • 50. Percentage area (ha) PEFC certified (excluding FSC certified area)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company does not operate in a country with a PEFC-endorsed SFM standard.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      51. Certified under voluntary sustainability certification scheme?

      [Externally verified] Three valid ISO 14:001 certificates are available. The company has not committed to SAN, ISCC, or PEFC.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      52. Commitment to become 100% certified under voluntary sustainability certification scheme?

      The company commits to become 100% certified under Sustainable Agriculture Network and PEFC by 2025.

  • Deforestation and biodiversity Deforestation and biodiversity
    13.75 / 21 65.5%
    • Organisation: 0.5 / 2 25%
    • Policy: 11 / 13 84.6%
    • Practice: 2.3 / 6 37.5%
    • Self-reported: 1.3 / 6 20.8%
    • External: 1 / 6 16.7%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      53. Commitment to zero conversion of natural ecosystems?

      The company commits to zero conversion of all natural ecosystems.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      54. Commitment to zero conversion of natural ecosystems applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to zero conversion of all natural ecosystems.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      55. Commitment to zero deforestation?

      The company commits to zero deforestation.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      56. Commitment to zero deforestation applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to zero deforestation.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      57. Criteria and cut-off date for defining deforestation and/or ecosystem conversion?

      The company defines forests as HCV or HCS areas and specifies any deforestation past 2015 will not be accepted.

    • P
      0 / 1

      58. Evidence of monitoring deforestation and/or ecosystem conversion?

      The company monitors 28 555,03 ha of land via satellite, this includes both company operations and those of suppliers. However, it is not clear how often monitoring takes place. Information is not externally verified.

    • P
      0 / 1

      59. Evidence of monitoring deforestation and/or ecosystem conversion in supplier operations?

      The company monitors 28 555,03 ha of land via satellite, this includes both company operations and those of suppliers. However, it is not clear how often monitoring takes place. Information is not externally verified.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      60. Amount of deforestation and/or ecosystem conversion recorded in own operations since cut-off date?

      The company reports that 11 ha of land were deforested "by mistake", the reporting period is not specified and it is unclear if this covers all deforestation hence partial scoring.

    • N
      0 / 1

      61. Amount of deforestation and/or ecosystem conversion recorded in supplier operations since cut-off date?

      The company reports four deforestation alerts outside concession areas to date (not since cut-off date), but only specifies "main rubber purchasing regions" not supplier concessions, hence no points can be awarded.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      62. Commitment to restoration of deforestation/conversion?

      The company commits to restore ecosystems in their own operations to their prior condition. The cut-off date beyond which deforestation/conversion is not accepted, and therefore will be restored, is 2015.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      63. Commitment to restoration of deforestation/conversion applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits suppliers to restore ecosystems in their operations to their prior condition. The cut-off date beyond which deforestation/conversion is not accepted, and therefore will be restored, is 2015.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      64. Implementing a landscape or jurisdictional level approach?

      The company commits to supporting landscape and jurisdictional level planning and policy efforts but does not provide examples of how it has contributed to or implemented these efforts. Information is not externally verified.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      65. Biodiversity policy?

      The company has a biodiversity policy, but it does not state time-bound targets to measure the impact of the policy. A subsidiary has a biodiversity action plan with multiple targets, but this does not cover all of the company's natural rubber operations.

    • N
      0 / 1

      66. Biodiversity policy applies to all suppliers?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      67. Identified species of conservation concern, referencing international or national system of species classification?

      [Externally verified] One of the company's subsidiaries has identified species of conservation concern using the IUCN Red List. Evidence is externally verified by TFT (now Earthworm Foundation).

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      68. Examples of species and/or habitat conservation management?

      The company reports it erects signs, marks boundaries and patrols reserves, as well as planting native plant species. Information is not externally verified.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      69. Commitment to no hunting or only sustainable hunting of species?

      The company commits to no hunting of all species in its operations.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      70. Commitment to no hunting or only sustainable hunting of species applies to all suppliers?

      The company reports a commitment to "no hunting of species applied to all suppliers". It is unclear if this covers all species, hence partial scoring.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      71. Commitment to protect areas from illegal activities?

      The company commits to protect the natural ecosystems and plantations under its management from illegal activities.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      72. Commitment to protect forest areas from illegal activities applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits suppliers to protect the natural ecosystems and plantations under their management from illegal activities.

    • N
      0 / 1

      73. Evidence of protecting forest areas from illegal activities?

  • HCV, HCS and impact assessments HCV, HCS and impact assessments
    7.75 / 11 70.5%
    • Organisation: 0 / 0 0%
    • Policy: 5.5 / 6 91.7%
    • Practice: 2.3 / 5 45%
    • Self-reported: 0 / 5 0%
    • External: 2.3 / 5 45%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      74. Commitment to conduct High Conservation Value (HCV) assessments?

      The company commits to conduct HCV assessments.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      75. Commitment to conduct High Conservation Value (HCV) assessments applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits suppliers to conduct HCV assessments.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      76. High Conservation Value (HCV) assessments available for all new plantings since 1st April 2019?

      [Externally verified] One HCV assessment is available, however this report does not cover all company expansions since 1st April 2019. The report is verified by Proforest.

    • N
      0 / 1

      77. High Conservation Value (HCV) management and monitoring plans available for all new plantings since 1st April 2019?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      78. Commitment to the High Carbon Stock (HCS) approach?

      The company commits to apply the HCS Approach, as defined by the HCS Approach Toolkit.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      79. Commitment to the High Carbon Stock (HCS) Approach applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to apply the HCS Approach, as defined by the HCS Approach Toolkit.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      80. High Carbon Stock (HCS) assessments available?

      [Externally verified] One HCS assessment is available, it is verified by TFT (now Earthworm). The assessment does not cover all expansions since 2015.

    • N
      0 / 1

      81. Peer review of all High Carbon Stock (HCS) assessments undertaken since April 2015 by the HCSA Quality Assurance Process?

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      82. Commitment to conduct social and environmental impact assessments (SEIAs)?

      The company commits to conduct SEIAs if a plot is equal to or less than 1000 ha.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      83. Commitment to conduct social and environmental impact assessments (SEIAs) applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to conduct SEIAs.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      84. Social and environmental impact assessment (SEIAs) undertaken, and associated management and monitoring plans?

      [Externally verified] Two environmental impact studies are available. One study is verified by KB & Associates (Ghana) Limited. As there are no SIAs and associated management and monitoring plans, scoring is partial.

  • Soils, fire and GHG emissions Soils, fire and GHG emissions
    12.5 / 19 65.8%
    • Organisation: 3.5 / 5 70%
    • Policy: 7 / 10 70%
    • Practice: 2 / 4 50%
    • Self-reported: 2 / 4 50%
    • External: 0 / 4 0%
    • P
      0.5 / 1

      85. Commitment to no planting on peat of any depth?

      The company commits to not plant in peat areas and states a definition of peat bog. However, the definition is not referenced in the text, therefore it cannot be ascertained whether this is a recognised definition of peat.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      86. Commitment to no planting on peat of any depth applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to no planting on peat of any depth.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      87. Landbank or planted area on peat (ha)?

      0 - The company states that it does not have a landbank on peat.

    • 88. Implementation of commitment to no planting on peat of any depth?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      89. Commitment to best management practices for soils and peat?

      The company commits to a limited selection of practices (protecting soil quality, preventing erosion, nutrient degradation, subsidence and contamination).

    • Y
      1 / 1

      90. Commitment to best management practices for soils and peat applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to best management practices for soils and peat.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      91. Evidence of best management practices for soils and peat?

      The company gives examples such as planting cover crops, utilising organic waste as fertiliser and planting with contour lines to reduce erosion. This information is not externally verified.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      92. Commitment to best/sustainable tapping practices?

      The company commits to sustainable tapping practices.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      93. Commitment to best/sustainable tapping practices applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to best tapping practices.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      94. Evidence of best/sustainable tapping practices?

      The company reports it trains suppliers on sustainable tapping practices, and lists which practices are observed in its operations. No evidence of implementation within it's own plantations was found. Information is not externally verified.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      95. Commitment to zero burning?

      The company commits to no burning.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      96. Commitment to zero burning applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to no burning.

    • N
      0 / 1

      97. Evidence of fire monitoring and management?

      The company states it has fire prevention measures in place for the dry season but gives no detail.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      98. Details/number of hotspots/fires in company estates/management units?

      14 - The company reports 14 fires in 2020.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      99. Details/number of hotspots/fires in suppliers operations/jurisdictions?

      6,000 - The company reports "6,000 bush fire alerts, outside concessions", the company does not specify if "outside of concessions" is supplier operations/jurisdictions hence partial scoring.

    • N
      0 / 1

      100. Time-bound commitment to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      101. GHG emissions intensity?

      The company reports an intensity of 0.283 T CO2eq /T rubber for 2020.

    • N
      0 / 1

      102. GHG emissions from land use change?

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      103. Progress towards commitment to reduce GHG emissions intensity?

      The company's GHG intensity has decreased from 0.290 T CO2eq/T rubber in 2019, to 0.283 in 2020. Information is not externally verified.

    • N
      0 / 1

      104. Methodology used to calculate GHG emissions?

      The company describes what is included in calculations but does not a comprehensive methodology or reference an established methodology used to calculate GHG emissions.

  • Water, chemical and pest management Water, chemical and pest management
    14.5 / 20 72.5%
    • Organisation: 1.5 / 2 75%
    • Policy: 10 / 11 90.9%
    • Practice: 3 / 7 42.9%
    • Self-reported: 3 / 7 42.9%
    • External: 0 / 7 0%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      105. Time-bound commitment to improve water use intensity?

      The company commits to reduce water intensity to 10m3 by the year 2022. Currently intensity is at 17.3m3/T of rubber.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      106. Water use intensity?

      17.3 - The company reports it used 17.3 m3/T of rubber in 2020.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      107. Progress towards commitment on water use intensity?

      The company reports a reduction in water intensity from 17.6 m3/t of rubber in 2019 to 17.3 in 2020. Figures are not externally verified.

    • N
      0 / 1

      108. Time-bound commitment to improve water quality (BOD or COD)?

      A study in 2020 showed that BOD and COD levels exceeded regulatory limits. A plan is in place to improve water quality, but a timebound commitment to improve figures could not be found.

    • N
      0 / 1

      109. Progress towards commitment on water quality (BOD or COD)?

      BOD and COD figures were higher in 2020 than 2019.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      110. Treatment of effluents from processing facilities?

      The company treats effluents from all processing facilities. Information is not externally verified.

    • 111. Treatment of effluents from manufacturing facilities?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      112. Commitment to protect natural waterways through buffer zones?

      The company commits to protect natural waterways through buffer zones.

    • N
      0 / 1

      113. Implementation of commitment to protect natural waterways through buffer zones?

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      114. Reducing odours from natural rubber processing or manufacuring facilities?

      The company reports to limit the generation of odours in its factories. Information is not externally verified.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      115. Commitment to minimise the use of chemicals, including pesticides and chemical fertilisers?

      The company commits to minimise the use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      116. Commitment to minimise the use of chemicals, including pesticides and chemical fertilisers, applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to minimise the use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      117. Commitment to no use of paraquat?

      The company commits to not use paraquat.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      118. Commitment to no use of paraquat applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to not use paraquat.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      119. Commitment to no use of World Health Organisation (WHO) Class 1A and 1B pesticides?

      The company commits to not use World Health Organisation (WHO) Class 1A and 1B pesticides.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      120. Commitment to no use of World Health Organisation (WHO) Class 1A and 1B pesticides applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to not use World Health Organisation (WHO) Class 1A and 1B pesticides.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      121. Commitment to no use of chemicals listed under the Stockholm Convention and Rotterdam Convention?

      The company commits to not use Stockholm and Rotterdam Convention chemicals.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      122. Commitment to no use of chemicals listed under the Stockholm Convention and Rotterdam Convention applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to not use Stockholm and Rotterdam Convention chemicals.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      123. Chemical usage per ha or list of chemicals used?

      The company lists the quantities of chemical pesticides used in its operations by type (fungicide, herbicide, insecticide) for 2020 and 2019. Figures for fertilisers are not reported.

    • N
      0 / 1

      124. Implementation of commitment to reduce chemical usage?

      The company reports figures for 2020 but not for 2019. A table published to demonstrate differences in pesticide use 2019-2020 is unclear as totals do not add up.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      125. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach?

      The company provides examples in its IPM strategy. Information is not externally verified.

  • Community, land and labour rights Community, land and labour rights
    28 / 35 80%
    • Organisation: 4.5 / 5 90%
    • Policy: 20.5 / 22 93.2%
    • Practice: 3 / 8 37.5%
    • Self-reported: 3 / 8 37.5%
    • External: 0 / 8 0%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      126. Commitment to human rights?

      The company commits to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      127. Commitment to human rights applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits suppliers to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

    • N
      0 / 1

      128. Progress on human rights commitment?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      129. Commitment to respect Indigenous and local communities' rights?

      The company commits to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the ILO Convention on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples (No. 169).

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      130. Commitment to indigenous and local communities' rights applies to all suppliers?

      The company reports to "Respect the rights of local and indigenous communities,and applies to all suppliers. In accordance with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples or the ILO Convention on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples (No. 169)", it is unclear if the company is committing to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples or the ILO Convention on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, neither or both, hence partial scoring.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      131. Commitment to respect legal and customary land tenure rights?

      The company commits to the FAO Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      132. Commitment to legal and customary land rights applies to all suppliers?

      The company reports to "respect legal and customary land rights applies to all suppliers or property rights and rights to access land / land use; or the FAO Voluntary Guidelines for Responsible Governance of Land Tenure, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security". The reoccurring use of the word 'or' makes it unclear what the company is committing to, hence partial scoring.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      133. Commitment to free, prior and informed consent (FPIC)?

      The company commits to respect FPIC.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      134. Commitment to free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to respect FPIC.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      135. Details on Free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) process available?

      The company commits to follow UN REDD Guidelines.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      136. Examples of local stakeholder engagement to prevent conflicts?

      The company has permanent staff to manage community relations, has set up a multi-stakeholder platform and community liaison committee, as well as organising monthly drop in days. This information is not externally verified.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      137. Details of process for addressing land conflicts available?

      Land conflicts are included in the company's grievance procedure.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      138. Supports the inclusion of women across natural rubber operations, including addressing barriers faced?

      The company states it hires women at all levels of the business, however, it does not state how it addresses the barriers faced by women in the workplace.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      139. Commitment to mitigate impacts on food security?

      The company commits to ensure food security for local communities by raising awareness on food crop cultivation while growing cash crops.

    • N
      0 / 1

      140. Progress on commitment to mitigate impacts on food security?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      141. Commitment to provide essential community services and facilities?

      The company commits to provide essential community services and facilities.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      142. Progress on commitment to provide essential community services and facilities?

      The company provides examples of housing employees or providing education opportunities. All but one example are over two years old. The company also reports a list of community expenses for the year 2021, this includes the construction of a town hall, renovation of a school, and sand-filing a road. Information is not externally verified.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      143. Commitment to provide business/work opportunities for local communities?

      The company commits to provide business and job opportunities for local communities.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      144. Commitment to Fundamental ILO Conventions or Free and Fair Labour Principles?

      In its reporting and policies, the company refers to the eight Fundamental ILO Conventions using the same language but does not always refer to the convention number.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      145. Commitment to Fundamental ILO Conventions or Free and Fair Labour Principles applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to all Fundamental ILO Conventions.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      146. Progress on commitment to respect all workers' rights?

      The company details training regarding labour codes and reports on collective bargaining agreements reached in each subsidiary. Information is not externally verified.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      147. Commitment to eliminate gender related discrimination with regards to employment?

      The company commits to prevent employment-related discrimination based on gender.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      148. Commitment to eliminate gender related discrimination with regards to employment applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to prevent employment-related discrimination based on gender.

    • N
      0 / 1

      149. Progress on commitment to eliminate gender related discrimination with regards to employment?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      150. Percentage or number of temporary employees?

      2,732 (22%) - Out of a total of 12,506 employees 2,732 were temporary in 2020.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      151. Percentage or number of women employees?

      1,340 (11%) - Out of a total of 12,506 employees 1,340 were women in 2020.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      152. Commitment to pay a living wage?

      The company commits to pay decent living wages to all workers.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      153. Commitment to pay a living wage applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to pay decent living wages to all workers.

    • N
      0 / 1

      154. Progress on commitment to pay a living wage?

      The company reports total remunerations paid, but does not report minimum or living wage salaries to employees by country of operation and employee category.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      155. Reporting of salary by gender?

      The company provides data on the total remunerations paid to women and to men in 2020, but it does not split the wages paid per employee category for locations of operations by gender.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      156. Commitment to address occupational health and safety?

      The company commits to address health and safety at work for all workers.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      157. Commitment to address occupational health and safety applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits to address health and safety at work for all workers.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      158. Provision of personal protective equipment and related training?

      The company has provided examples of PPE use and training. Information is not externally verified.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      159. Time lost due to work-based injuries?

      The company reports an accident frequency rate, severity rate, and total days off due to accidents.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      160. Number of fatalities as a result of work-based accidents?

      1 - Figure for 2020.

  • Smallholders and suppliers Smallholders and suppliers
    4.5 / 11 40.9%
    • Organisation: 1 / 1 100%
    • Policy: 1.5 / 3 50%
    • Practice: 2 / 7 28.6%
    • Self-reported: 2 / 7 28.6%
    • External: 0 / 7 0%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      161. Commitment to support smallholders?

      The company commits to support smallholders.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      162. Percentage of supply from smallholders?

      75% - The company reports that "about 75% of the Group's production was supplied from outgrowers in 2020.".

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      163. Programme to support scheme smallholders/outgrowers?

      The company has a programme but it is unclear if it applies to scheme, outgrower or independent smallholders. Information is not externally verified.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      164. Percentage of scheme smallholders/outgrowers involved in programme?

      The company provides figures for the number of smallholders involved in programmes in 2019, however, it is unclear what type of smallholder the figures refer to. Data for 2020 is available but published in a table with no headings for columns so it is unclear how to determine the number of smallholders supported. Information is not externally verified.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      165. Programme to support independent smallholders?

      The company has a programme but it is unclear if it applies to scheme, outgrower or independent smallholders. Information is not externally verified.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      166. Percentage of independent smallholders involved in programme?

      The company provides figures for the number of smallholders involved in programmes in 2019, however, it is unclear what type of smallholder the figures refer to. Data for 2020 is available but published in a table with no headings for columns so it is unclear how to determine the number of smallholders supported. Information is not externally verified.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      167. Process used to engage smallholder suppliers on compliance with company's policy and/or legal requirements?

      Suppliers are required to answer questionnaires on compliance with the company's supplier code of conduct, but it is not clear how questionnaires are then used to prioritise or engage with suppliers.

    • N
      0 / 1

      168. Number or percentage of smallholder suppliers engaged on compliance with company's policy and/or legal requirements?

    • 169. Process used to prioritise, assess and/or engage non-smallholder suppliers on compliance with company's policy and/or legal requirements?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • 170. Number or percentage of non-smallholder suppliers assessed and/or engaged on compliance with company's policy and/or legal requirements?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • 171. Suspension or exclusion criteria for non-smallholder suppliers?

      This indicator is disabled as it is not applicable to this company.

    • N
      0 / 1

      172. Time-bound action plans (including Key Performance Indicators) for suppliers to be in compliance with natural rubber sourcing commitments?

    • N
      0 / 1

      173. Proportion of direct and indirect supply that comes from natural rubber plantations which are compliant with natural rubber sourcing policies?

    • N
      0 / 1

      174. Percentage of supply coming from agroforestry?

  • Governance and grievances Governance and grievances
    4.75 / 7 67.9%
    • Organisation: 0 / 0 0%
    • Policy: 4 / 5 80%
    • Practice: 0.8 / 2 37.5%
    • Self-reported: 0.8 / 2 37.5%
    • External: 0 / 2 0%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      175. Commitment to ethical conduct and prohibition of corruption?

      The company commits to fair conduct and the prohibition of corruption.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      176. Commitment to ethical conduct and prohibition of corruption applies to all suppliers?

      The company commits all suppliers to ethical conduct and the prohibition of corruption.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      177. Progress on commitment to ethical conduct and prohibition of corruption?

      Each of the company's subsidiaries has established an ethics committee which report back to the company's committee, employees are trained on the company Code of Conduct, and in 2019 a ethical purchasing charter was published to provide a framework for responsible sourcing. This information is not externally verified.

    • N
      0 / 1

      178. Disclosure of the company’s management approach to tax and payments to governments?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      179. Whistleblowing procedure?

      The company's whistleblowing procedure is available.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      180. Own grievance or complaints system open to all stakeholders?

      The company have a grievance system available to local communities and employees.

    • N
      0 / 1

      181. Details of complaints and grievances disclosed?

SPOTT is a ZSL initiative.
Zoological Society of London (ZSL)