Skip to content
Menu Search

Société Internationale de Plantations d'Hévéas (SIPH)

Natural rubber assessment
  • Latest update: November 2019
  • Next scheduled: November 2020

Show ESG scores Show supply chain scores Modify score weighting

Company assessment: Société Internationale de Plantations d'Hévéas (SIPH) – November 2019

Assessment date:

Score by disclosure type:

Total: 38.7% 45.25 / 117
  • Organisation: 15.3 / 28 54.5%
  • Policy: 19.5 / 48 40.6%
  • Practice: 10.5 / 41 25.6%
  • Self-reported: 9.5 / 41 23.2%
  • External: 1 / 41 2.4%
  • Sustainability policy and leadership Sustainability policy and leadership
    7.25 / 10 72.5%
    • Organisation: 4 / 5 80%
    • 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 clearly commits to the sustainability policy of its parent company SIFCA Group.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      2. Sustainability natural rubber policy or commitment applies to all sourcing excluding smallholders?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      3. High-level position of responsibility for sustainability?

      A Sustainable Development Manager per subsidiary.

    • 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 board members?

      4 (50%)

    • Y
      1 / 1

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

      17.09%

    • 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 mentions collaborations with stakeholders, including an environmental NGO, but does not provide details.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      9. Sustainability report published within last two years?

      2,018

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      10. Climate risks assessment available?

      The company conducted a climate risk assessment.

  • Landbank, maps and traceability Landbank, maps and traceability
    4.5 / 10 45%
    • Organisation: 4.5 / 9 50%
    • Policy: 0 / 1 0%
    • Practice: 0 / 0 0%
    • Self-reported: 0 / 0 0%
    • External: 0 / 0 0%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      11. Lists countries and operations?

      Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria, Liberia.

    • Y
      1 / 1

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

      60,402

    • Y
      1 / 1

      13. Total natural rubber planted area (ha)?

      58,521

    • 14. Scheme smallholders/outgrowers planted area (ha)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it does not source from from scheme smallholders/outgrowers. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this.

    • N
      0 / 1

      15. Unplanted (areas designated for future planting) (ha)?

    • P
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company only mentions 430 ha of protected forests in Nigeria.

    • N
      0 / 1

      17. Maps of estates/management units?

      The company only provides static maps not at a local scale.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      18. Number of company owned natural rubber processing facilities?

      8

    • N
      0 / 1

      19. Names and coordinates of company owned natural rubber processing facilities?

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

      21. Commitment to traceability of the whole supply chain?

      The company requires its suppliers "whenever possible" to provide traceability information throughout the whole supply chain but does not directly commit to trace natural rubber itself.

  • Deforestation and biodiversity Deforestation and biodiversity
    2.5 / 10 25%
    • Organisation: 0 / 1 0%
    • Policy: 2 / 5 40%
    • Practice: 0.5 / 4 12.5%
    • Self-reported: 0.5 / 4 12.5%
    • External: 0 / 4 0%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      22. Commitment to zero deforestation or zero conversion of natural ecosystems?

      The company has a zero deforestation commitment.

    • N
      0 / 1

      23. Commitment to zero deforestation or zero conversion of natural ecosystems applies to all sourcing excluding smallholders?

    • N
      0 / 1

      24. Evidence of monitoring deforestation?

    • N
      0 / 1

      25. Amount of illegal/non-complaint deforestation recorded in own operations?

    • N
      0 / 1

      26. Implementing a landscape or juridictional level approach?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      27. Commitment to biodiversity conservation?

    • P
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company states that it identied species of conservation concern, but does not reference a system of classification.

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

      30. Commitment to protect areas from illegal activities?

    • N
      0 / 1

      31. Commitment not to use genetically modified organisms?

  • HCV, HCS and impact assessments HCV, HCS and impact assessments
    2 / 6 33.3%
    • Organisation: 0 / 0 0%
    • Policy: 2 / 3 66.7%
    • Practice: 0 / 3 0%
    • Self-reported: 0 / 3 0%
    • External: 0 / 3 0%
    • Y
      1 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

      33. High Conservation Value (HCV) assessments available?

    • N
      0 / 1

      34. High Conservation Value (HCV) management and monitoring plans available?

    • Y
      1 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

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

  • Soils, fire and GHG emissions Soils, fire and GHG emissions
    1.5 / 15 10%
    • Organisation: 0.5 / 4 12.5%
    • Policy: 0.5 / 6 8.3%
    • Practice: 0.5 / 5 10%
    • Self-reported: 0.5 / 5 10%
    • External: 0 / 5 0%
    • P
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company commits to identify, maintain and protect peatland, but does not clearly commit to no planting on peat of any depth.

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

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

      The company only commits to a limited selection of practices (limiting erosion, promoting organic life) and for soils only.

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

      43. Commitment to best/sustainable tapping practices?

    • N
      0 / 1

      44. Evidence of best/sustainable tapping practices?

    • N
      0 / 1

      45. Commitment to zero burning?

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      46. Evidence of management and monitoring fires?

      The company states it has fire prevention measures in place for the dry season.

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

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

      The company has a commitment to reduce GHG emissions but it is not time-bound, and it does not mention a specific amount.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      49. GHG emissions intensity?

      The company reports GHG emission figures but not as intensity.

    • N
      0 / 1

      50. Report GHG emissions from land use change?

    • N
      0 / 1

      51. Methodology used to calculate GHG emissions?

    • N
      0 / 1

      52. Progress towards commitment to reduce GHG emissions intensity?

      The company reports progress in GHG emissions (70,686 T Co2 eq. in 2018 against 73,519 TCO2 eq. in 2017) but also states that the methodology has changed. It is unclear whether GHG emissions intensity has increased or decreased.

  • Water, chemical and pest management Water, chemical and pest management
    3.25 / 17 19.1%
    • Organisation: 0.5 / 2 25%
    • Policy: 0.5 / 6 8.3%
    • Practice: 2.3 / 9 25%
    • Self-reported: 2.3 / 9 25%
    • External: 0 / 9 0%
    • N
      0 / 1

      53. Time-bound commitment to improve water quality (BOD and COD)?

    • N
      0 / 1

      54. Progress towards commitment on water quality (BOD and COD)?

      The company reports an increase in both BOD and COD between 2017 and 2018.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      55. Treatment of effluents from processing facilities?

      The company treats effluents from processing facilities.

    • N
      0 / 1

      56. Percentage of processing facilities with closed-loop water treatment system (100%)?

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      58. Water use intensity?

      The company reports water use figures but not as intensity.

    • N
      0 / 1

      59. Progress towards commitment on water use intensity?

      The company only reports water use, but not water use intensity, and this increased between 2017 and 2018.

    • N
      0 / 1

      60. Commitment to protect natural waterways through buffer zones?

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      62. Reducing odours from natural rubber processing facilities?

      The company treats gas emissions to reduce negative effects of odour.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company commits to reduce the use of chemicals to a minimum but does not mention both chemical fertilisers and pesticides.

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

      66. Implementation of commitment to reduce chemical usage?

    • N
      0 / 1

      67. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach?

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      69. Waste management system in place to avoid negative impacts?

      The company has a waste management system.

  • Community, land and labour rights Community, land and labour rights
    15.25 / 29 52.6%
    • Organisation: 4 / 5 80%
    • Policy: 9 / 17 52.9%
    • Practice: 2.3 / 7 32.1%
    • Self-reported: 2.3 / 7 32.1%
    • External: 0 / 7 0%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      70. Commitment to human rights?

    • N
      0 / 1

      71. Commitment to human rights applies to all sourcing excluding smallholders?

    • N
      0 / 1

      72. Commitment to respect indigenous and local communities' rights?

    • P
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company commits to respect legal and customary land tenure rights only in relation to FPIC.

    • Y
      1 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

      75. FPIC commitment applies to all sourcing excluding smallholders?

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

      77. Examples of local stakeholder engagement to prevent conflicts?

    • N
      0 / 1

      78. Details of process for addressing land conflicts available?

    • N
      0 / 1

      79. Commitment to support the inclusion of women across natural rubber operations, including addressing barriers faced?

    • N
      0 / 1

      80. Commitment to mitigate impacts on food security?

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • Y
      1 / 1

      82. Commitment to provide essential community services and facilities?

    • P
      0.75 / 1

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

      The company provides examples on community services and facilities provided.

    • P
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company mentions contributing to evonomic development of local communities however it does not explicitly mention providing business or work opportunities.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      85. Commitment to respect all workers' rights?

    • Y
      1 / 1

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

    • Y
      1 / 1

      87. Commitment to eliminate gender related discrimination with regards to employment and occupation?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      88. Percentage or number of temporary employees?

      23.89%

    • Y
      1 / 1

      89. Percentage or number of women employees?

      12.83%

    • Y
      1 / 1

      90. Commitment to pay at least minimum wage?

    • N
      0 / 1

      91. Progress on commitment to pay at least minimum wage?

    • N
      0 / 1

      92. Reporting of salary by gender?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      93. Commitment to address occupational health and safety?

    • Y
      1 / 1

      94. Time lost due to work-based injuries?

      1,098 - Lost days due to work-based accidents.

    • N
      0 / 1

      95. Reduction of time lost due to work-based injuries?

      The number of lost days due to work-based accidents has increased between 2017 (817) and 2018 (1098). The accident frequency rate has also increased.

    • Y
      1 / 1

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

      0

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      97. Zero fatalities as a result of work-based accidents?

      The company reports no fatalities in 2018.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      98. Provision of personal protective equipment and related training?

      The company provides personal protective equipment.

  • Certification standards/Sustainability initiatives Certification standards/Sustainability initiatives
    2.5 / 5 50%
    • Organisation: 1 / 1 100%
    • Policy: 0 / 1 0%
    • Practice: 1.5 / 3 50%
    • Self-reported: 0.5 / 3 16.7%
    • External: 1 / 3 33.3%
    • Y
      1 / 1

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

    • Y
      1 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • P
      0.5 / 1

      102. Certified under voluntary sustainability certification scheme?

      The company only has operations ISO 14001 certified.

    • N
      0 / 1

      103. Percentage area (ha) FSC certified?

  • Smallholders and suppliers Smallholders and suppliers
    3.75 / 10 37.5%
    • Organisation: 0.8 / 1 75%
    • Policy: 1.5 / 4 37.5%
    • Practice: 1.5 / 5 30%
    • Self-reported: 1.5 / 5 30%
    • External: 0 / 5 0%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      104. Commitment to support smallholders?

    • 105. Programme to support scheme smallholders / outgrowers?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it does not source from scheme smallholders/outgrowers. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this.

    • 106. Percentage of scheme smallholders / outgrowers involved in programme?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it does not source from scheme smallholders/outgrowers. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      107. Programme to support independent smallholders?

      The company has a programme to support independent smallholders.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      108. Percentage of independent smallholders involved in programme?

      The company reports that over 1000 suppliers are supported.

    • P
      0.75 / 1

      109. Percentage of supply from smallholders?

      72%

    • N
      0 / 1

      110. Percentage of supply coming from agroforestry?

    • P
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company states that it has a process but only limited details are given.

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

      113. Suspension or exclusion criteria for non-smallholder suppliers?

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

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

  • Governance and grievances Governance and grievances
    2.75 / 5 55%
    • Organisation: 0 / 0 0%
    • Policy: 2 / 3 66.7%
    • Practice: 0.8 / 2 37.5%
    • Self-reported: 0.8 / 2 37.5%
    • External: 0 / 2 0%
    • Y
      1 / 1

      116. Commitment to ethical conduct and prohibition of corruption?

    • P
      0.75 / 1

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

      The company provides information on how its implementing anti-bribery and corruption policies.

    • Y
      1 / 1

      118. Whistleblowing procedure?

    • N
      0 / 1

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

    • N
      0 / 1

      120. Details of complaints and grievances disclosed?

Media monitor: Société Internationale de Plantations d'Hévéas (SIPH)

SPOTT gathers reports and stories from global media sources, covering specific company activities related to the assessment indicator categories. ZSL does not assess the validity of these reports.

Category filter:
No article available.

Scoring criteria: Société Internationale de Plantations d'Hévéas (SIPH)

Scoring criteria guide how ZSL conducts SPOTT assessments and allocates scores to ensure a fair and consistent approach, setting the expectations for companies on how they should publish ESG data. The full natural rubber indicator framework contains 120 indicators across 10 categories.

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