Skip to content
Menu Search
  • Latest update: July 2019
  • Next scheduled: July 2020

  • About this company:

    Founded in 1948, Maderera Bozovich operates in Peru.

  • Landbank
    175,007 hectares
  • Thomson Reuters ticker:
    Private company
  • Bloomberg ticker:
    Private company
  • Website:

Company assessment: Maderera Bozovich – July 2019

Assessment date:

Total: 21.9% 26.5 / 121
  • Sustainability policy and leadership Sustainability policy and leadership
    1.5 / 9 16.7%
    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company has a policy for its Otorongo and Chullachaqui forest concessions, but it is unclear if this covers all of the company's forest operations

    • No
      0 / 1

      2. Sustainability policy or commitment applies to all sourcing?

    • No
      0 / 1

      3. High-level position of responsibility for sustainability?

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

      This indicator is disabled as the company is not publicly listed

    • 5. Percentage or number of women board members?

      This indicator is disabled as the company is not publicly listed

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

      7. Sustainability report published within last two years?

    • No
      0 / 1

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

      Only the company's subsidiary Forestal Otorongo SAC is an FSC member

    • Yes
      1 / 1

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

      Study with San Diego Zoo of effect of sustainable logging practices on mammals

    • No
      0 / 1

      10. Climate risks assessment available?

    • No
      0 / 1

      11. Natural capital assessment available?

  • Landbank, mills and traceability Landbank, mills and traceability
    5 / 21 23.8%
    • No
      0 / 1

      12. Lists countries and operations?

      The company only provides a map with limited information

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      175,007 - The company has 77,169 ha and 97,838 ha of production forest under its Otorongo and Chullachaqui concessions respectively, but it is unclear if this covers all of its operations

    • No
      0 / 1

      14. Total area of forest plantation (ha)?

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      8,008 - The company has 4,069 ha of protected forest within its Otorongo concession, and 3,939 ha of protected forest within its Chullachaqui concession, but it is unclear if this covers all of the company's operations

    • No
      0 / 1

      18. Area of Intact Forest Landscape (ha)?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      19. Number of Forest Management Units (FMUs)?

      2 - The company's Otorongo and Chullachaqui concessions each comprise one FMU. It is unclear if this covers all of the company's operations

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      20. Maps of forest management units (FMUs)?

      Geo-coordinates for two of the company's concessions are provided in the FSC public summaries, but it is unclear if this covers all of the company's operations

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      21. Forest management plans available for all FMUs?

      There is a Forest Management Plan (FMP) available for Forestal Otorongo and Chullachaqui, but it is unclear if this covers all of the company's operations

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      22. Monitoring of forest management plan implementation?

      The company reports monitoring of its FMP for Forestal Otorongo, however no monitoring data could be found for Chullachaqui

    • 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

    • 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

    • 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

    • 26. Number of company owned pulp and paper mills?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't own pulp or paper mills. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

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

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't own pulp or paper mills. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • No
      0 / 1

      28. Number of company owned sawmills?

    • No
      0 / 1

      29. Maps or addresses of company owned sawmills?

    • No
      0 / 1

      30. Number of supplier mills?

    • No
      0 / 1

      31. Maps or addresses of supplier mills?

    • Yes
      1 / 1

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

    • Yes
      1 / 1

      33. Procedures to trace raw materials to FMU level?

    • No
      0 / 2

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

    • No
      0 / 2

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

  • Deforestation and biodiversity Deforestation and biodiversity
    3.5 / 12 29.2%
    • No
      0 / 1

      36. Commitment to zero conversion of natural forest?

    • No
      0 / 1

      37. Zero conversion commitment applies to all sourcing?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      38. Commitment to minimise the impact of logging roads?

      The company provides some examples of road planning, but do not have a clear commitment

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      39. Commitment to protect forest areas from illegal activities?

      The company does not have its own policy, but states an objective within an FSC public summary to "protect and conserve the forests with all its resources and avoided illegal activities that can put the integrity of the forest at risk"

    • No
      0 / 1

      40. Evidence of monitoring deforestation?

    • No
      0 / 1

      41. Amount of deforestation recorded?

      The company reports some data for Forestal Otorongo however the data is more than two years old

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      42. Commitment to biodiversity conservation?

      The company has a commitment in its Otorongo and Chullachaqui policies but it is unclear if this covers all of the company's operations

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • Yes
      1 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • Yes
      1 / 1

      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
    2 / 8 25%
    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company does not have a direct commitment to conduct HCV assessments across all of its operations. However, the company has committed to not be directly or indirectly involved in the destruction of high conservation values in forestry operations. This commitment is made through the FSC Policy for Association (FSC-POL-01-004). For this half points are awarded

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      49. HCV commitment applies to all sourcing?

      The company has committed not be directly or indirectly involved in the destruction of high conservation values in forestry operations. This commitment is made through the FSC Policy for Association (FSC-POL-01-004). For this half points are awarded

    • 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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      51. High Conservation Value (HCV) assessments available?

      HCV summaries could be found for the company's Otorongo and Chullachaqui concessions, but it is unclear if these cover all of the company's operations

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      Management and monitoring activities are included in the Otorongo HCV summary

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

      54. High Carbon Stock (HCS) assessments available?

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • 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

  • Soils, fire and GHGs Soils, fire and GHGs
    1 / 14 7.1%
    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      59. Commitment to reduced impact logging?

      The company uses reduced impact logging techniques, but it is unclear if this done in all of the company's operations

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

      61. Commitment on peatland planting applies to all sourcing?

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company gives example of soil management but no examples could be found for peat

    • No
      0 / 1

      64. Commitment to zero burning?

    • No
      0 / 1

      65. Commitment to zero burning applies to all sourcing?

    • No
      0 / 1

      66. Evidence of management and monitoring fires?

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

      69. Progress towards reducing GHG emission intensity?

    • No
      0 / 1

      70. Report GHG emissions from land use change?

    • No
      0 / 1

      71. Methodology used to calculate GHG emissions?

  • Water, chemical and waste management Water, chemical and waste management
    1 / 9 11.1%
    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company has riparian zones, but it is unclear if these cover all of the company's operations

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

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't own pulp or paper mills. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • No
      0 / 1

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

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

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't own pulp or paper mills. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • 78. Progress towards commitment on water use intensity?

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't own pulp or paper mills. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

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

      This indicator is disabled as the company's reporting broadly suggests that it doesn't own pulp or paper mills. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

      83. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      Pesticide use is given in the FSC Public Summaries, but it is unclear if this covers all of their operations

  • Community, land and labour rights Community, land and labour rights
    8 / 22 36.4%
    • Yes
      1 / 1

      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

      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

      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

      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

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

    • No
      0 / 1

      90. FPIC commitment applies to independent suppliers?

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

      92. Examples of local stakeholder engagement to prevent conflicts?

    • Yes
      1 / 1

      93. Details of process for addressing land conflicts available?

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      95. Commitment to provide essential community services and facilities?

      The commitment does not cover all of the company's operations

    • 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

    • No
      0 / 1

      97. Commitment to respect all workers' rights?

    • Yes
      1 / 1

      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)

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • 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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      101. Percentage or number of temporary employees?

      7 - The number of contracted workers is provided for Chullachaqui concession within the FSC audit report. Data as of 2016

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      102. Percentage or number of women employees?

      5 - Data is provided only for the Chullachaqui concession within the company's FSC audit report. Data as of 2016

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      103. Payment of minimum wage?

      The company's FSC Public Summaries state that minimum wage is paid to workers, but it is unclear if this covers all of the company's operations

    • No
      0 / 1

      104. Reporting of salary by gender?

    • No
      0 / 1

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

      The company's policy for Otorongo and Chullachaqui commits to the health of workers but it is unclear if this covers all operations and it does not refer to the ILO Code of Practice on Safety and Health in Forestry Work

    • No
      0 / 1

      106. Time lost due to work-based injuries?

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      108. Provision of personal protective equipment and related training?

      The company states it provides PPE and training in its policy for Otorongo but this does not cover all of the company's operations

  • Certification standards Certification standards
    1 / 14 7.1%
    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • Yes
      1 / 1

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

      2,021

    • No
      0 / 1

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

      180,015 - The company has FSC certification for 183,015 ha of forest, but it is unclear whether this covers all of its forestry operations therefore the percentage cannot be calculated

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 2

      115. Percentage area (ha) FSC FM certified?

      180,015 - The company has FSC certification for 183,015 ha of forest, but it is unclear whether this covers all of its forestry operations and therefore the percentage cannot be calculated

    • No
      0 / 2

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

    • No
      0 / 2

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

    • No
      0 / 2

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

  • Smallholders and suppliers Smallholders and suppliers
    3 / 6 50%
    • No
      0 / 1

      119. Programme to support outgrower scheme smallholders?

    • No
      0 / 1

      120. Percentage of outgrower scheme smallholders involved in programme?

    • Yes
      1 / 1

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

    • Yes
      1 / 1

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

    • Yes
      1 / 1

      123. Suspension or exclusion criteria for suppliers?

    • No
      0 / 1

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

  • Governance and grievances Governance and grievances
    0.5 / 6 8.3%
    • No
      0 / 1

      125. Commitment to ethical conduct and prohibition of corruption?

    • 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

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

    • 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

    • No
      0 / 1

      129. Whistleblowing procedure?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company states it has a complaints system but no details could be found

    • No
      0 / 2

      131. Details of grievances disclosed?

Media monitor: Maderera Bozovich

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.

Scoring criteria: Maderera Bozovich

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 indicator framework contains 131 indicators across 10 categories.

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