Skip to content
Menu Search

Founded in 2005, Eldorado Brasil Celulose SA is engaged in pulpwood production, trading and distribution

  • Parent company:
    J&F Investimentos S.A. (50.59%), CA Investment (Brazil) S.A. (49.40%)
  • Landbank (timber/pulp):
    229,592 hectares
  • Thomson Reuters ticker:
    Private company
  • Bloomberg ticker:
    Private company
  • Activities:
    Pulpwood production, trading and distribution
  • Locations:
    Brazil (Mato Grosso do Sul, Mato Grosso, Sao Paulo)
  • Headquarters:
    Brazil
  • Related companies:
    Eldorado has been bought by Paper Excellence in 2017, a subsidiary of Sinar Mas who is also the parent of Asia Pulp and Paper (APP).
  • Parent website:
  • Website:

Company assessment: Eldorado Brasil Celulose SA – July 2019

SPOTT assesses companies against over 100 indicators across ten categories. Click on the icons or bars below to expand each category for further details, scoring and links to reports and sources.

Assessment date:

Total: 51.3% 58 / 113
  • Sustainability policy and leadership Sustainability policy and leadership 6.5 / 9 72.2%
    • Companies should publish sustainability policies or similar commitments covering their entire supply chain — including third party suppliers — implemented and enforced through high-level leadership that engages with wider industry schemes.

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      1. Sustainable forestry policy or commitment for all its operations?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      2. Sustainability policy or commitment applies to all sourcing?

      The company has a code of conduct which applies to all its suppliers and includes social and governance policies in line with its sustainability policy. However, the policy does not cover environmental issues. Half a point has been awarded

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      3. High-level position of responsibility for sustainability?

      The company has a Director in charge of Human Resources, Sustainability and Communication

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      4. One or more board members have responsibility for sustainability?

      This indicator is disabled as the company is not publicly listed

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      5. Percentage or number of women board members?

      This indicator is disabled as the company is not publicly listed

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

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

      0 (0%)

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      7. Sustainability report published within last two years?

      2,017

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      8. Member of multiple industry schemes or other external initiatives to improve forest management or transparency?

      FSC

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      9. Activities with government, NGOs or academic institutions to improve the sustainability of forest products?

      Participation in various stakeholder groups (e.g. local WWF Forums; IPEF, Forestry Studies and Research Institute)

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      10. Climate risks assessment available?

      The company reports conducting research to predict potential impacts from climate change, however, no assessment/data has been published

    • No
      0 / 1
      Source

      11. Natural capital assessment available?

      The company monitors water withdrawal at all withdrawal sites on its properties in accordance with water stewardship standards, however, it does not follow Natural Capital Protocol

  • Landbank, mills and traceability Landbank, mills and traceability 9 / 18 50%
    • Companies should publicly report figures on their total landbank and details of different areas under their management. They should also disclose maps of their forest management units and provide forest management plans, as well as details on mills.

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      12. Lists countries and operations?

      Brazil (plantations, mill)

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      13. Total area of natural forest designated for wood/wood fibre production (ha)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it only produces wood/wood fibre from plantation forests

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      14. Total area of forest plantation (ha)?

      229,592 - The company reports having a production area of 229,592 ha out of a total landbank of 359,260 ha (figures published in 2018)

    • n/a
      -
      Source

      15. Area of plantation/natural forest within outgrower schemes (ha)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it doesn't use outgrower schemes for wood/wood fibre production

    • No
      0 / 1
      Source

      16. Unplanted (areas designated for future development as plantation forest) (ha)?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      17. Conservation set-aside and/or HCV area (ha)?

      106,520 - The company's FSC surveillance report (last updated in April 2019) suggests that it has at least 106,519.72 ha conservation area. However this report does not cover all of the company's operations

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      18. Area of Intact Forest Landscape (ha)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it doesn't have any intact forest landscapes within its landbank

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      19. Number of Forest Management Units (FMUs)?

      13

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      20. Maps of forest management units (FMUs)?

      0.5 - The company only provides names of farms and a static map

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      21. Forest management plans available for all FMUs?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      22. Monitoring of forest management plan implementation?

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      23. Company has provided valid legal documents to Open Timber Portal on use rights (at the time of SPOTT assessments)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      24. Company has provided valid legal documents to Open Timber Portal on forest management (at the time of SPOTT assessments)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      25. Company has provided valid legal documents to Open Timber Portal on timber harvesting (at the time of SPOTT assessments)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      26. Number of company owned pulp and paper mills?

      1 - The company is currently working on expanding the current mill (Vanguarda 2.0 project), but this is not yet operational

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      27. Maps or addresses of company owned pulp and paper mills?

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      28. Number of company owned sawmills?

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it doesn't own sawmills

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      29. Maps or addresses of company owned sawmills?

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it doesn't own sawmills

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      30. Number of supplier mills?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      31. Maps or addresses of supplier mills?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      32. Procedures to trace raw materials to country of harvest?

      The company has a FSC CoC certificate which counts as the procedure for the certified portion of all raw materials the company sources

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      33. Procedures to trace raw materials to FMU level?

      The company has a FSC CoC certificate which counts as the procedure for the certified portion of all raw materials the company sources

    • No
      0 / 2
      Source

      34. Percentage of supply traceable to country level (above 80%)?

      The company has CoC certificates covering its wood supply coming from the states of Mato Grosso do Sul and Goiás. However, it is unclear what percentage of all the company's supply that represents

    • No
      0 / 2
      Source

      35. Percentage of supply traceable to FMU level (above 75%)?

      The company has CoC certificates covering their wood supply coming from the states of Mato Grosso do Sul and Goiás. However, it is unclear what percentage of all the company's supply that represents

  • Deforestation and biodiversity Deforestation and biodiversity 7 / 10 70%
    • Companies should commit to address deforestation and to set aside areas for conservation. They should report on any activities to manage or restore habitat in their conservation areas, or monitor deforestation in their supply chains. They should also provide evidence of biodiversity conservation and species or habitat management.

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      36. Commitment to zero conversion of natural forest?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      37. Zero conversion commitment applies to all sourcing?

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      38. Commitment to minimise the impact of logging roads?

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it only produces wood/wood fibre from plantation forests

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      39. Commitment to protect forest areas from illegal activities?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      40. Evidence of monitoring deforestation?

      The company states that drones are monitoring an average 500 hectares daily to indentify environmental damage and erosion and the data is fed into a system that builds a 3D model of the company's land (incl. conservation areas)

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      41. Amount of deforestation recorded?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      42. Commitment to biodiversity conservation?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

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

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      44. Implementing a landscape-level approach to biodiversity conservation?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

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

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      46. Commitment to sustainably manage the use of non-timber forest products (NTFPs)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it only produces wood/wood fibre from plantation forests

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      47. Commitment not to use genetically modified organisms?

      The company has committed to not be directly or indirectly involved in the introduction of genetically modified organisms in forestry operations. This commitment is made through the FSC Policy for Association (FSC-POL-01-004)

  • HCV, HCS and impact assessments HCV, HCS and impact assessments 3.5 / 8 43.8%
    • Companies should commit to the High Conservation Value (HCV) and High Carbon Stock (HCS) approaches, and to conduct social and environmental impact assessments (SEIA). They should develop and publish summaries of assessments and monitoring and management plans.

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

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

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      49. HCV commitment applies to all sourcing?

      The company has a commitment to only source wood/wood fibre that meets FSC Controlled Wood requirements which includes not sourcing wood from forests with a high conservation value

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      50. Commitment to only use licensed High Conservation Value (HCV) assessors accredited by the HCV Resource Network's Assessor Licensing Scheme (ALS)?

      This indicator is disabled until sufficient number of HCV ALS licensed assessors are available for the location where the company operates

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      51. High Conservation Value (HCV) assessments available?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      53. Commitment to the High Carbon Stock (HCS) Approach?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      54. High Carbon Stock (HCS) assessments available?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      56. Social and environmental impact assessments (SEIAs) available?

      The company has provided some information on its Environmental Impacts EIA, however no information on Social Impacts is available

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      57. Company has provided valid legal documents to Open Timber Portal on impact assessments (at the time of SPOTT assessments)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

  • Water, chemical and waste management Water, chemical and waste management 3.5 / 12 29.2%
    • Companies should commit to protect peatland and undertake best management practices for soils and peat, as well as commit to reduced impact logging. They should also have policies on zero burning and to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Companies should report their GHG emissions, as well as details on any fires that occurred in or around their estates, along with evidence for managing and monitoring fires.

    • No
      0 / 1
      Source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

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

      The company has no commitment in place but reports that it reduced BOD by 97.4% in 2017

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      74. Commitment to protection of natural waterways through buffer zones?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      75. Evidence of treatment of pulp and paper mill effluent?

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      76. Evidence of sawmill run-off containment and wastewater treatment?

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it doesn't own sawmills

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      78. Progress towards commitment on water use intensity?

      25,711.6 - The company reports reduction in the amount of water consumption intensity (m3/ADT) in 2017 compared to 2016 and 2015. However there is no time-bound commitment in place to reduce water use

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      79. Commitment to eliminate chlorine and chlorine compounds for bleaching?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      81. No use of World Health Organisation (WHO) Class 1A and 1B pesticides?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      82. No use of chemicals listed under the Stockholm Convention and Rotterdam Convention?

    • No
      0 / 1
      Source

      83. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

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

      Figures for pesticides and herbicides used can be found in 2017 FSC Audit Report, however this report does not cover all of the company's operations (i.e. some FMUs are excluded from certification)

  • Soils, fire and GHGs Soils, fire and GHGs 3.5 / 10 35%
    • Companies should commit to managing water use and water quality, providing evidence through time-bound reduction plans, policies on toxic chemical use, waste management and treatment of wastewater and mill effluents.

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      58. Commitment to best management practices for soils and/or peat?

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      59. Commitment to reduced impact logging?

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it only produces wood/wood fibre from plantation forests

    • n/a
      -
      No source

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

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it doesn't have landbank on peat

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      61. Commitment on peatland planting applies to all sourcing?

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it does not have suppliers with landbank on peat

    • n/a
      -
      No source

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

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it doesn't have landbank on peat

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      63. Evidence of best management practices for soils and/or peat?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      64. Commitment to zero burning?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      65. Commitment to zero burning applies to all sourcing?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      66. Evidence of management and monitoring fires?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      67. Details/number of hotspots/fires in FMUs controlled by the company?

    • No
      0 / 1
      Source

      68. Time-bound commitment to reduce GHG emissions intensity?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      69. Progress towards reducing GHG emission intensity?

      0.16 - Company reports progress towards reducing GHG intensity but no target in place

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      70. Report GHG emissions from land use change?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      71. Methodology used to calculate GHG emissions?

      Brazilian GHG Protocol

  • Community, land and labour rights Community, land and labour rights 15 / 22 68.2%
    • Companies should commit to respect human rights, including those of indigenous peoples and local communities, and free, prior and informed consent (FPIC). Companies should respect the rights of workers, report relevant workforce data, and address with health and safety issues.

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      85. Commitment to human rights, referencing the UN Declaration on Human Rights or UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights?

      The company has committed to not be directly or indirectly involved in the violation of human rights in forestry operations. This commitment is made through the FSC Policy for Association (FSC-POL-01-004), which defines human rights as those established through the UN Declaration of Human Rights

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      86. Commitment to human rights applies to all sourcing?

      The company has committed to not be directly or indirectly involved in the violation of human rights in forestry operations. This commitment is made through the FSC Policy for Association (FSC-POL-01-004), which defines human rights as those established through the UN Declaration of Human Rights

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

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

      The company has committed to not be directly or indirectly involved in the violation of human rights in forestry operations. This commitment is made through the FSC Policy for Association (FSC-POL-01-004), which encompasses the rights of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples as established by the ILO Convention 169

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      88. Commitment to respect legal and customary property rights?

      The company has committed to not be directly or indirectly involved in the violation of traditional rights in forestry operations. This commitment is made through the FSC Policy for Association (FSC-POL-01-004), which encompasses customary rights. This policy does not reference legal rights and no reference to legal rights could be found in company sources

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      90. FPIC commitment applies to independent suppliers?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      91. Details of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) process available?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      No source

      92. Examples of local stakeholder engagement to prevent conflicts?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      93. Details of process for addressing land conflicts available?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      94. Commitment to support the inclusion of women across forestry operations, including addressing barriers faced?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      95. Commitment to provide essential community services and facilities?

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      96. Company has provided valid legal documents to Open Timber Portal on population rights (at the time of SPOTT assessments)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      97. Commitment to respect all workers' rights?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      98. Reference to Fundamental ILO Conventions?

      The company has committed to not be directly or indirectly involved in the violation of any of the ILO Core Conventions. This commitment is made through the FSC Policy for Association (FSC-POL-01-004)

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

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

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      100. Company has provided valid legal documents to Open Timber Portal on labour regulations (at the time of SPOTT assessments)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      101. Percentage or number of temporary employees?

      0 (0%) - The company reports having no temporary employees as of 2017

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      102. Percentage or number of women employees?

      582 (15.3%)

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      103. Payment of minimum wage?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      104. Reporting of salary by gender?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      105. Commitment to address occupational health and safety, referencing the ILO Code of Practice on Safety and Health in Forestry Work?

      The company commits to address occupational health and safety but no reference to the ILO Code of Practice on Safety and Health in Forestry Work given

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      106. Time lost due to work-based injuries?

      620 - Figure relates to number of days lost due to occupational injuries

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

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

      0

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      108. Provision of personal protective equipment and related training?

  • Certification standards Certification standards 4 / 14 28.6%
    • Companies should be certified by credible certification standards, or have time-bound commitments to achieve 100% certification of forest management units. They should also ensure that their supply is verified as being in legal compliance and commit to sourcing certified wood/wood fibre.

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      109. Time-bound plan for achieving 100% third-party legality verification of FMUs or achieved?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      110. Time-bound plan to source only wood/wood fibre that is in legal compliance verified by a third party?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      111. Percentage area (ha) verified as being in legal compliance by a third party?

      350,826 (97.65%) - The company reports it operates on 359,260.46 ha land (incl. conservation areas) and has 350,826.49 ha of Forest Area that is FSC-FM/CoC certified. This represents 97.65% of the total forest area controlled by the company (figures published in 2017 and 2018)

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      112. Percentage of all wood/wood fibre supply traded/processed verified as being in legal compliance by a third party?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      113. Time-bound plan for achieving 100% FSC FM certification of FMUs or achieved 100% FSC-certification of FMUs?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      114. Commitment to source only wood/wood fibre that meets FSC Controlled Wood requirements?

    • Yes
      2 / 2
      Source

      115. Percentage area (ha) FSC FM certified?

      350,826 (97.65%) - The company reports it operates on 359,260.46 ha land (incl. conservation areas) and has 350,826.49 ha of Forest Area that is FSC-FM/CoC certified. The represents 97.65% of the total forest area controlled by the company (figures published in 2017 and 2018)

    • No
      0 / 2
      No source

      116. Percentage of wood/wood fibre supply from outgrower scheme and/or independent suppliers that is FSC FM certified?

    • No
      0 / 2
      No source

      117. Percentage of all wood/wood fibre supply traded/processed that are FSC certified (above 75%)?

    • No
      0 / 2
      Source

      118. Percentage area (ha) PEFC certified (excluding FSC certified area)?

      The company states that the majority of its area is certified by Cerflor. However, it is not possible to accurately calculate the percentage area PEFC certified, that is not FSC certified

  • Smallholders and suppliers Smallholders and suppliers 3 / 4 75%
    • Companies should report details of any programmes or schemes to support outgrower scheme smallholders, as well as criteria to assess suppliers on compliance with company policies, and in what cases suppliers should be suspended or excluded due to non-compliance.

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      119. Programme to support outgrower scheme smallholders?

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it doesn't use outgrower schemes for wood/wood fibre production

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      120. Percentage of outgrower scheme smallholders involved in programme?

      This indicator is disabled as the company has informed ZSL that it doesn't use outgrower schemes for wood/wood fibre production

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      Source

      122. The company has a Due Diligence System (DDS)?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      123. Suspension or exclusion criteria for suppliers?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      124. Percentage of suppliers assessed and/or engaged on compliance with company requirements?

      172 - Figure represents new suppliers in 2016 that were assessed by the company. Additionally, the company states that 3,000 suppliers were assessed in 2015

  • Governance and grievances Governance and grievances 3 / 6 50%
    • Companies should operate in an ethical manner at all levels, providing accessible channels and clear procedures for both employees and external stakeholders to raise any grievance or complaint with the company, as well as allowing for whistleblowing.

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      125. Commitment to ethical conduct and prohibition of corruption?

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      126. Company has provided valid legal documents to Open Timber Portal on legal registration (at the time of SPOTT assessments)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • No
      0 / 1
      Source

      127. Disclosure of the company's management approach to tax and payments to governments?

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      128. Company has provided valid legal documents to Open Timber Portal on taxes, fees and royalties (at the time of SPOTT assessments)?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      129. Whistleblowing procedure?

      The company has an external Ombudsman channel which allows for anonymity. However, no clear description of the steps taken could be identified

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 2
      Source

      131. Details of grievances disclosed?

      The company provides a summary of the grievances in 2017 and states their status

Media monitor: Eldorado Brasil Celulose SA

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 found for the selected categories.
SPOTT is a ZSL initiative.
Zoological Society of London (ZSL)