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

  • About this company:

    Shin Yang is a conglomerate headquartered in Malaysia,

  • Landbank
    841,995 hectares
  • Thomson Reuters ticker:
    Private company
  • Bloomberg ticker:
    Private company
  • Website:

Company assessment: Shin Yang – July 2019

Assessment date:

Total: 18.6% 22.5 / 121
  • Sustainability policy and leadership Sustainability policy and leadership
    1 / 9 11.1%
    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company has policies for its logging and forest plantation divisions however these do not cover processing operations

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      2. Sustainability policy or commitment applies to all sourcing?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      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. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • 5. Percentage or number of women board members?

      This indicator is disabled as the company is not publicly listed. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      7. Sustainability report published within last two years?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company states that it collaborates with the Sarawak Forestry Corporation and University Putra Malaysia, and that planned studies include silviculture scheme and yield, determining the best harvest time, biological disease control and carbon footprint, but does not provide further details of these. It also collaborates with the Heart of Borneo project

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      10. Climate risks assessment available?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      11. Natural capital assessment available?

  • Landbank, mills and traceability Landbank, mills and traceability
    4.5 / 21 21.4%
    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      12. Lists countries and operations?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      544,851 - An external audit of the company's operations lists six Forest Timber Licenses within Sarawak, Malaysia, covering a total of 544,851 ha. However it is unclear if this covers all the company's natural forest operations

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      14. Total area of forest plantation (ha)?

      297,144 - An external audit of the company's operations lists three Forest Timber Licenses within Sarawak, Malaysia, covering a total of 297,144 ha. However it is unclear if this covers all the company's natural forest operations

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      28,489.1 - The company reports the size of protected areas in three of its management units, but this does not cover the full scope of the company's operations

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      18. Area of Intact Forest Landscape (ha)?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      19. Number of Forest Management Units (FMUs)?

      9 - An external audit of the company's operations lists six Forest Timber Licenses, and three License to Plant Forests within Sarawak, Malaysia, covering a total of 841,995 ha. However the company reports on its website it has four plantations and only two natural forest licenses

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      20. Maps of forest management units (FMUs)?

      The company has static maps for its FMUs on its website, and some additional maps are found in Global Forest Watch datasets, however it is unclear whether this covers all the company's operations

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      21. Forest management plans available for all FMUs?

      The company presents one Forest Management Plan, and four Forest Plantation Management Plans, but this does not cover the full scope of the company's operations

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      22. Monitoring of forest management plan implementation?

      The company provides limited monitoring information for some FMUs, but this does not cover the full scope of the company's operations

    • 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 reports that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal

    • 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 reports that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal

    • 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 reports that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal

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

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      28. Number of company owned sawmills?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      29. Maps or addresses of company owned 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

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

      The company has PEFC and FSC CoC certifications which cover the certified part of the company's supply

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      33. Procedures to trace raw materials to FMU level?

      The company has PEFC and FSC CoC certifications which cover the certified part of the company's supply

    • No
      0 / 2
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 2
      No source

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

  • Deforestation and biodiversity Deforestation and biodiversity
    6 / 12 50%
    • 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?

    • Yes
      1 / 1

      38. Commitment to minimise the impact of logging roads?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      39. Commitment to protect forest areas from illegal activities?

      The company has commitments to prevent illegal activities in their Forest Management Units, and Forest Plantation Management Units, but it does not clearly apply to all its operations so partial points have been awarded for this indicator

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      40. Evidence of monitoring deforestation?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      41. Amount of deforestation recorded?

    • Yes
      1 / 1

      42. Commitment to biodiversity conservation?

    • Yes
      1 / 1

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company mentions it protects and creates corridors for wildlife

    • Yes
      1 / 1

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      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
    1 / 8 12.5%
    • 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 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

    • 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?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      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 reports that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal

  • Soils, fire and GHGs Soils, fire and GHGs
    1.5 / 14 10.7%
    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      59. Commitment to reduced impact logging?

      The company states that it has a commitment to "ensure the timber harvesting is adhering to reduced impact logging practice" and describes its RIL system as including road planning, planning of landing sites and skid trails, and closure of skid trails, but does not make a full commitment to best practice

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      61. Commitment on peatland planting applies to all sourcing?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      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 makes reference to employing some best management practices for soil, including reduced impact logging, controlling erosion by planting cover crops, maintaining riparian buffer zones, and not working during dry weather, but does not state that it employs best management practices for 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?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      66. Evidence of management and monitoring fires?

      The company states that it has a developed a patrol schedule to monitor fires in protected and HCV areas within four of its Forest Plantation Management Units (FPMPs), has signed an MoU with the Natural Resource Environment Board, Sarawak on establishing and implementing a SOP for Peat Fire Prevention and Suppression for one of its FPMPs, and has adopted a forest fire monitoring and prevention plan from the EIA of one other FPMP. However, this does not explicitly cover the company's natural forest-based operations and therefore partial points were awarded.

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      69. Progress towards reducing GHG emission intensity?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      70. Report GHG emissions from land use change?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      71. Methodology used to calculate GHG emissions?

  • Water, chemical and waste management Water, chemical and waste management
    0.5 / 9 5.6%
    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      It is not clear that the company's commitments to provide buffer zones apply to all operations, therefore partial points are awarded

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

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      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 does not 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 does not 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 does not own pulp or paper mills. Please note that ZSL has been unable to confirm this

    • 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
      No source

      83. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

  • Community, land and labour rights Community, land and labour rights
    7.5 / 22 34.1%
    • 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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company's commitment does not clearly apply to all the company's operations, and therefore partial points are awarded

    • 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?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      92. Examples of local stakeholder engagement to prevent conflicts?

      The company only provides one example of local stakeholder engagement

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

      93. Details of process for addressing land conflicts available?

      The company states that Liason Committees exist within their FMUs to handle conflicts pertaining to the recognition of the legal and customary rights of the local communities. However, no details of the process are given, and it is not clear that a similar mechanism exists across all operations, so only partial points are awarded

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      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 company reports that it has repaired access roads and assisted in the construction of a long house and water pipe in one Forest Plantation Management Unit, but does not have a clear commitment to provide essential community services

    • 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 reports that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      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
      No source

      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 reports that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      101. Percentage or number of temporary employees?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      102. Percentage or number of women employees?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      103. Payment of minimum wage?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      104. Reporting of salary by gender?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      No reference to the ILO Code of Practice

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      106. Time lost due to work-based injuries?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      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's Policy of Commitment for tree plantation operations includes a commitment to ensure all employees are trained in safety procedures. However, this does not cover all employees so partial points have been awarded for this indicator

  • Certification standards Certification standards
    0 / 14 0%
    • 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?

    • No
      0 / 1

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

      The company makes reference to Malaysia Criteria and Indicators for Forest Plantation Management Certification for some of its Forest Plantation Management Units (FPMUs), and to PEFC-certified areas and Sarawak Timber Legality Verification within one of its FPMUs. However, the percentage area cannot be calculated from the information given, and therefore no points have been awarded for this indicator

    • 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?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 2
      No source

      115. Percentage area (ha) FSC FM certified?

    • 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

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

      The company refers to PEFC-certified areas within one Forest Plantation Management Unit, and certificates for four FPMUs are listed on the PEFC website; however, it is not possible to calculate percentage area certified from the information provided and therefore no points have been awarded for this indicator

  • Smallholders and suppliers Smallholders and suppliers
    0 / 6 0%
    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      119. Programme to support outgrower scheme smallholders?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      120. Percentage of outgrower scheme smallholders involved in programme?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      123. Suspension or exclusion criteria for suppliers?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      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
      No source

      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 reports that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      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 reports that it doesn't operate in a geography currently covered by Open Timber Portal

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      129. Whistleblowing procedure?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1

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

      The company states that Liaison Committees for management units have responsibility for grievances and providing fair compensation in case of loss or damage affecting the legal customary rights or livelihoods of local people, but does not go into any detail about what this involves

    • No
      0 / 2
      No source

      131. Details of grievances disclosed?

Media monitor: Shin Yang

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: Shin Yang

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)