Timber and pulp assessment summary – July 2018
Chris Eves and Eszter Wainwright-Déri | 18 Jul 2018 | London, UK
SPOTT assesses 50 timber and pulp producers on the public disclosure of their policies, operations and commitments to environmental, social and governance (ESG) best practice, to facilitate corporate engagement and increase industry transparency.
SPOTT encourages stakeholders to engage with producers and traders, as company policies and commitments may not always translate into effective implementation on the ground.
Indicator categories:
SPOTT scores timber and pulp producers using up to 110 ESG indicators across 10 categories. Click the categories below to find out more about the companies, and visit their pages to view full assessments.
31.1%
Average score:
-
Sustainability policy and leadership
42.2%
- 22/50 (44%) companies have put in place a clear and comprehensive sustainability policy. Only six* (12%) companies extend their sustainability policy to third parties.
- 21/50 (42%) companies have published a sustainability report in the last two years.
- 23/50 (46%) companies are working with government, non-governmental organisations, or academic institutions to improve the sustainability of forest products.
-
Landbank, FMUs and mills
39.3%
- 20/381 (53%) companies clearly disclose their total area of forest plantation, while just 14/372 (38%) disclose the total area of natural forest they control for wood/wood fibre production.
- 27/50 (54%) companies have made at least some maps available for their Forest Management Units (FMUs), but only 8/50 (16%) companies have provided georeferenced maps for all their FMUs.
- Only 1/383 (2%) companies discloses the total area of intact forest landscape4 found within its operational area.
1. This indicator is disabled for companies that do not own forest plantations.
2. This indicator is disabled for companies that do not own natural forests for wood/wood fibre production.
3. This indicator is disbaled for companies that have no intact forest landscape within their operations.
4. Can be defined as a territory within today's global extent of forest cover minimally influenced by human economic activity, with an area of at least 500 km2 (50,000 ha) and a minimal width of 10 km. -
Deforestation and biodiversity
39.5%
- 10/371 (27%) companies have a clear commitment to minimise the impact of logging roads.
- Just 7/50 (14%) companies are implementing a landscape approach to biodiversity conservation.
- 32/50 (64%) companies have a clear commitment to set-aside areas for conservation, while 27/50 (54%) provide examples of how they are managing these areas for the benefit of biodiversity.
1. This indicator is disabled for companies that do not own natural forests for wood/wood fibre production. -
HCV, HCS and impact assessment
23.5%
- Only 12/50 (24%) companies have a commitment to conduct High Conservation Value (HCV) assessments for all new development and planting. 5/47*1 companies (11%) extend this commitment to their outgrowers and/or independent suppliers.
- 6/50 (12%) make all their HCV assessment reports publicly available.
- 9/50 (18%) companies have a clear commitment to conduct social and environmental impact assessments (SEIAs) for all new development and planting.
- Just 3/50 (6%) companies made the results of all their SEIAs publicly available.
1. This indicator is disabled for companies that have no outgrower scheme and no independent suppliers. -
Soils, fire and GHG emissions
21.2%
- 8/50 (16%) companies commit to best management practices for soils and/or peat.
- Only 8/371 (22%) companies have a commitment to use reduced impact logging (RIL) techniques across all their operations.
- 14/50 (28%) companies provide evidence of undertaking both fire monitoring and management activities.
- Just 3/50 (6%) companies have a time-bound commitment to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity. All of these companies are reporting progress towards their GHG targets.
1. This indicator is disabled for companies that do not own natural forests for wood/wood fibre production. -
Water, chemical and waste management
20.0%
- 4/201 (20%) companies with pulp or paper mills have a time-bound commitment to improve water use, while three* (15%) are reporting progress towards their water use commitment.
- Just 8/50 (16%) companies report that they are using buffer or riparian zones to protect natural waterways across all their operations.
- 9/50 (18%) companies have a commitment to not use2 World Health Organisation (WHO) Class 1A and 1B pesticides, while only 7/50 (14%) have an equivalent commitment for chemicals listed under the Stockholm Convention and Rotterdam Convention.*
1. This indicator is disabled for companies that do not own pulp or paper mills.
2. No use at all or only in emergency/exceptional circumstances (e.g. have a Pesticide Derogation from the FSC). -
Community, land and labour rights
41.9%
- 37/50 (74%) companies have a commitment to respect human rights, while 34/471 (72%) companies extend this to their outgrower scheme and/or independent suppliers.
- 35/50 (70%) companies are committed to respect indigenous and local communities' rights, but just 8/50 (16%) have a full commitment to obtain free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) prior to all new developments.
- 35/50 (70%) companies clearly commit to all eight fundamental International Labour Organisation (ILO) Conventions.2
- Only 7/50 (14%) companies provide evidence that they are paying the minimum wage to all their workers.
1. This indicator is disabled for companies that have no outgrower scheme and no independent suppliers.
2. Eight Fundamental ILO Conventions: Freedom of Association (No. 87); Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining (No. 98); No Forced Labour (No. 29 & No. 105); Minimum Age (No. 138); Worst Forms of Child Labour (No. 182); Equal Remuneration (No. 100); No Discrimination (No. 111). -
Certification standards
15.8%
- 19/50 (38%) companies have more than 75% of their area verified as being in legal compliance by a third party. Just 3/47*1 (6%) report any of their supply as being verified legal by a third party.
- Only 4/50 (8%) companies are 100% Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Forest Management (FM) certified.
- 6/471 (13%) companies have a commitment to only source wood or wood fibre that meets FSC Controlled Wood requirements.
1. This indicator is disabled for companies that have no outgrower scheme and no independent suppliers. -
Smallholders and suppliers
15.8%
- 8/401 (20%) companies have a programme to support outgrower smallholders, but only two* (5%) provide details of how many outgrowers are supported.
- Only 12/472 (26%) companies report they have a process for prioritising, assessing and/or engaging suppliers on compliance with their policy and/or legal requirements.
- 9/472 (19%) companies report the number of suppliers that they have assessed or engaged.
1. This indicator is disabled for companies that have no outgrower scheme smallholders.
2. This indicator is disabled for companies that have no outgrower scheme and no independent suppliers. -
Governance and grievances
26.8%
- 25/50 (50%) companies have a clear commitment to ethical conduct and the prohibition of corruption.
- 13/50 (26%) companies have a grievance procedure that is open to both internal and external stakeholders like employees and local communities.
- 7/50 (14%) companies report some details of grievances, but just three* (6%) provide comprehensive details of the grievances reported to them and their resolution.
Key findings:
- The average score of companies is 31.1% in July 2018, compared to 38.9% during the last assessment of timber and pulp companies in November 2017.
- 5/50 (10%) companies have an overall score of at least 66% (higher transparency), compared to 3/24 (13%) companies in November 2017.
- 29/50 (58%) companies have a score below 33% (lower transparency) compared to 11/24 (46%) companies in the last assessment round.
- 17/24 (71%) companies assessed in 2017 saw an increase in their scores in 2018 – the average change in score was +3.9%.
- 7/24 (29%) companies assessed in 2017 saw a decrease in their scores in 2018 – the average change in score was -3.6%.
- Companies perform best in the categories Sustainability policy and leadership and Community, land and labour rights, scoring an average of 42% within these categories.
- There is room for improvement in Certification standards and Smallholders and suppliers, with companies scoring an average of 16% within these categories.
- The average score of companies with some or all their landbank Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Forest Management (FM) certified or Programme for Endorsement of Forestry Certification (PEFC) FM certified is 45% compared to 11% for companies lacking such certification.
1. PEFC certification indicator disabled for companies that operate in countries without an endorsed PEFC standard; companies that have 100% of their landbank
FSC FM certified, and companies that have a time-bound plan for achieving 100% FSC FM certification of their landbank.
Check the company scores table to rank all 50 timber and pulp producers and access their full assessments.
Read Terra incognita: missing maps in the tropical forestry sector hamper efforts to combat forest loss.
Download a printable summary of the July 2018 assessments of 50 timber and pulp producers.
Download a printable summary of the November 2017 assessments of 24 timber and pulp producers.
