Skip to content
Menu Search

Shin Yang is a conglomerate headquartered in Malaysia, engaged in timber production, processing, manufacturing, trading

  • Landbank (timber/pulp):
    582,922 hectares
  • Market cap:
    106,922,657 USD
  • Thomson Reuters ticker:
    SYSC.KL
  • Bloomberg ticker:
    SHIN:MK
  • ISIN:
    MYL5173OO009
  • Activities:
    Timber production, timber processing and manufacturing, trading and distribution.
  • Locations:
    Malaysia (Sarawak)
  • Headquarters:
    Malaysia
  • Website:

Company assessment: Shin Yang – July 2018

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: 22.3% 24 / 107.5
  • Sustainability policy and leadership Sustainability policy and leadership 1 / 6 16.7%
    • Companies should publish sustainability policies or similar covering their entire supply chain — including third party suppliers — implemented and enforced through high-level leadership that engages with wider industry schemes.

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

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

      The company's Forestry Policy relates to its logging division, so does not clearly apply to its Forest Plantation Management Units, or Wood Products

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      2. Sustainability policy or commitment applies to direct and third-party suppliers?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      3. High-level position of responsibility for sustainability?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      4. Sustainability report published within last two years?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      6. 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, and biological disease control, but does not provide further details of these. It also collaborates with the Heart of Borneo project

  • Landbank, FMUs and mills Landbank, FMUs and mills 4.5 / 13 34.6%
    • 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 supplier pulp and paper mills.

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      7. Lists countries and operations?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

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

      556,973

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      9. Total area of forest plantation (ha)?

      25,948.8 - The company states figures of planted areas for four Forest Plantation Management Units, but it is not clear whether this accurately represents the full scope of the company's operations

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

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

      8,684.4 - 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

      13. Area of Intact Forest Landscape (ha)?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      14. Number of Forest Management Units (FMUs)?

      10 - An external audit of the company's operations lists seven Forest Timber Licenses, and three License to Plant Forests within Sarawak, Malaysia, covering a total of 854,117 ha

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      15. Maps of forest management units (FMUs)?

      The company has static maps for some of its FMUs, 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
      Source

      16. 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
      Source

      17. Monitoring of forest management plan implementation?

      The company provides limited monitoring information for some FMUs, but this does not detail performance against FMP objectives, or cover the full scope of the company's operations

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      18. 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

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      19. 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

      20. Number of company owned sawmills?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      21. Maps or addresses of company owned sawmills?

  • Deforestation and biodiversity Deforestation and biodiversity 7 / 15 46.7%
    • 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 species conservation and biodiversity protection.

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      22. Commitment to zero conversion of natural forest?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      23. Zero conversion commitment applies to outgrower scheme and independent suppliers?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      24. Commitment to minimise the impact of logging roads?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      25. 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 their operations so partial points have been awarded for this indicator

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      26. Evidence of monitoring deforestation?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      27. Amount of deforestation recorded?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      28. Commitment to biodiversity conservation?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      29. Commitment to set aside areas for conservation?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      30. Examples of habitat management and/or habitat restoration of set-aside areas?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      32. Commitment to protect species of conservation concern, referencing international or national system of species classification?

      The company makes reference to the IUCN classification of threatened species in its Forest Plantation Management Units, but does not make a clear commitment to protect species across all operations

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      34. 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)

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      35. Commitment to only use alien species where impacts can be controlled?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      36. Examples of species conservation activities?

      The company briefs staff on protection of protected species, and displays posters of protected species in conspicuous locations; has installed anti-hunting signage stating that employees are not to hunt, that company vehicles are not to be used in hunting and transport of meat of wild animals, and that selling of wild animals is not allowed in the licensed area

  • HCV, HCS and impact assessments HCV, HCS and impact assessments 1 / 9 11.1%
    • 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 monitoring and management plans, and provide evidence through SEIA, HCV and HCS assessments, typically published in summary form due to the sensitive nature of certain sites.

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      37. 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
      Source

      38. HCV commitment applies to outgrower scheme and independent suppliers?

      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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      40. High Conservation Value (HCV) assessments available?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      43. High Carbon Stock (HCS) assessments available?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

  • Soils, fire and GHG emissions Soils, fire and GHG emissions 1.5 / 14 10.7%
    • 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 any fires that occurred in or around their estates, along with plans for managing and monitoring fires.

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      47. 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

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      49. Commitment on peatland planting applies to outgrower scheme and independent suppliers?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      51. 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

      52. Commitment to zero burning?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      53. Commitment to zero burning applies to outgrower scheme and independent suppliers?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      54. 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

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      57. Progress towards reducing GHG emission intensity?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      58. Report GHG emissions from land use change?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      59. Methodology used to calculate GHG emissions?

  • Water, chemical and waste management Water, chemical and waste management 1.5 / 10 15%
    • 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

      60. Time-bound commitment to improve water quality?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      61. Progress towards commitment on water quality?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      62. 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

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      63. 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

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

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      65. Time-bound commitment to improve water use?

      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

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      66. Progress towards commitment on water use?

      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

    • n/a
      -
      No source

      67. mmitment 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

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      68. Evidence of minimising or recycling solid waste produced during sawmilling processes?

      The company states it achieves zero waste by processing forestry residues into a biomass product

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      72. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

  • Community, land and labour rights Community, land and labour rights 7 / 19.5 35.9%
    • Companies should commit to respect human rights, including those of indigenous peoples and local communities, consulted with free, prior and informed consent (FPIC). Companies should respect the rights of workers, report relevant workforce data, and comply with health and safety legislation.

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      74. Commitment to human rights, referencing the UN Declaration of 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

      75. Commitment to human rights applies to outgrower scheme and independent suppliers?

      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

      76. 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

      77. 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
      Source

      78. 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

      79. FPIC commitment applies to independent suppliers?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      81. 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

      82. Commitment to mitigate impacts on food security?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      83. 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 in place

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      84. Commitment to respect all workers' rights?

    • Yes
      1 / 1
      Source

      85. 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 / 0.5
      No source

      86. Total number of employees?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      87. Percentage or number of temporary employees?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      88. Percentage or number of women employees?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      89. Commitment to pay minimum wage?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      90. 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

      91. Time lost due to work-based injuries?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      93. 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 / 10 0%
    • Companies should be certified by credible certification standards, or have time-bound commitments to achieve 100% certification of both forest management units and outgrower schemes. They should also commit to only sourcing certified wood/wood fibre and ensuring that their supply is verified as being in legal compliance.

    • No
      0 / 1
      Source

      94. 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

      95. Percentage wood/wood fibre supply verified as being in legal compliance by a third party?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      96. Time-bound plan for achieving 100% FSC FM certification of FMUs?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 2
      No source

      98. Percentage area (ha) FSC FM certified?

    • No
      0 / 2
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 2
      Source

      100. Percentage area (ha) PEFC certified?

      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 / 5 0%
    • Companies should report details of any programmes or schemes to support both schemed and independent 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.

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      101. Programme to support outgrower scheme smallholders?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      102. Percentage of outgrower scheme smallholders involved in programme?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      104. Suspension or exclusion criteria for suppliers?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

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

  • Governance and grievances Governance and grievances 0.5 / 6 8.3%
    • 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.

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      106. Commitment to ethical conduct and prohibition of corruption?

    • No
      0 / 1
      No source

      107. Whistleblowing procedure?

    • Partial
      0.5 / 1
      Source

      108. Own grievance or complaints system?

      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 / 1
      No source

      109. Grievance or complaints system is accessible to internal and external stakeholders?

    • No
      0 / 2
      No source

      110. 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.
SPOTT is a ZSL initiative.
Zoological Society of London (ZSL)