Forest 500 company assessments

Thank you for viewing your 2023 Forest 500 assessment.

  • Use this form to respond to the assessment you have been sent as a CSV. When completing this form, you will have to refer to the CSV to see your organisation’s answer.
  • The form is broken into seven pages: Overall Approach; Palm Oil; Soy; Beef; Leather; Timber; and Pulp & Paper.
    • Each page is ordered by indicator for the four main areas of assessment: Overall Approach, Content of Commitments (including Scope of Commitments), Associated Human Rights Abuses, and Implementation and Reporting. The last three areas of the assessment are assessed on a per-commodity basis, for any of the commodities your organisation is exposed to through its supply chains.
    • Companies are identified as powerbrokers for at least one of the six commodities, and are also assessed for any of the other commodities they are exposed to through their supply chains. You can find out more about that on the Forest 500 website.
    • You can leave any pages relating to commodities your organisation is not assessed on as blank.
  • This form also includes guidance on how an organisation can score for each indicator and what the possible answers are for each indicator.
  • You can respond to each indicator, should you feel that the publicly available information published before 15 September 2023 on your website has been misinterpreted or not incorporated in our assessment.
  • You will be able to save your responses in the form and return to them at a later time, if needed.

You will not be able to submit comments after 16:30 BST on 30 October 2023.

If you have any questions about completing the form, please email [email protected].

"*" indicates required fields

Your Name*
Your Email Address*

Overall Approach

Indicator 1.01

Does the financial institution have an organisation-wide commitment to eliminate deforestation and/or conversion of natural ecosystems from its financing activities for all high risk commodity supply chains?

Guidance: Overarching commitments must be financial institution-wide (i.e. must apply to all financing and activities). Conversion-free is understood as no conversion of natural ecosystems anywhere (also referred to as zero/zero gross conversion), deforestation-free is understood as no loss of natural forests anywhere (also referred to as zero/zero gross deforestation), while zero net deforestation is understood as a commitment to offset forest loss through forest restoration. Commitments through certification alone do not score for this indicator. Commitments which are specific to biomes/regions are recorded here, but do not score any points.

The commitment must apply to apply to at least all high risk commodities that a company produces and/or procures, namely soy, palm oil, beef, leather, timber, and pulp and paper.

To score points the financial institution must commit to one of these approaches and cannot aim to ‘reduce deforestation’ through these means.

Some interpretation has been required where financial institutions have not used the terms ‘zero’ or ‘zero net’ in their commitments; for example, commitments to ‘eliminate’ deforestation are interpreted as deforestation-free.

Potential answers for this indicator:

  • Conversion-free commitment
  • Deforestation-free commitment
  • Zero-net deforestation commitment
  • Region/biome-specific DCF commitment
  • No overarching commitment

Indicator 1.02

Does the financial institution recognise deforestation, conversion, and associated human rights abuses as a business risk?

Guidance: The financial institution recognises that deforestation, conversion, and associated human rights abuses pose a risk to the financial institution itself. Business risk can be recognised in multiple ways, including but not limited to financial, operational, competition, or reputational risk.

This risk can be identified using terms including ‘risk’, ‘threat’, and ‘impact’, as well as through language acknowledging the potential future impact of deforestation/conversion/associated human rights abuses on the financial institution, including those suggesting that the financial institution is adapting its financing activities to respond to environmental issues caused by deforestation, or the recognition of these issues as a risk to the reputation of the institution.

Potential answers for this indicator:

  • Yes
  • No

Indicator 1.03

Does the financial institution have a climate target which includes at least the scope 1 and 2 emissions of the clients/holdings in their financial portfolios?

Guidance: This is a non-scoring indicator. To be recorded as ‘yes’, the financial institution must have a target to reduce their impact on the climate, through greenhouse gas emissions, which explicitly includes at least the scope 1 and scope 2 emissions, and ideally scope 3 emissions, of the clients/holdings in their financial portfolios. To be considered a target, the commitment must have a numerical element, e.g. a measurable target or deadline.

Potential answers for this indicator:

  • Yes
  • No

Indicator 1.04

Does the financial institution require the clients/holdings to have an anti-corruption policy?

Guidance: To be awarded points, the financial institution must require that clients/holdings in their portfolios have an anti-corruption policy, as well as a policy prohibiting abusive tax arrangements. Requiring only one of these policies scores half points.

Potential answers for this indicator (additive scoring):

  • Anti-corruption policy
  • Policy on prohibiting abusive tax arrangements
  • No policy

Indicator 1.05

Is the financial institution involved in any collaborative finance sector initiatives or advocacy for legislation focused on deforestation?

Guidance: To be awarded full points, the financial institutions must be involved in advocacy for legislation focused on deforestation, conversion, and associated human rights, and be involved in a collaborative finance-sector initiative focused on these topics. Financial institutions which are only involved in either legislative advocacy or a collaborative initiative can only score half points.

Potential answers for this indicator:

  • Yes, involved in a collaborative finance sector initiative focused on deforestation
  • Yes, involved in advocacy for legislation focused on deforestation
  • No

Indicator 1.06

Does the financial institution have a commitment to increase nature- and people- positive investment?

Guidance: This is a non-scoring indicator. To be recorded as ‘Yes’ for this indicator, the financial institution must commit to increasing nature- and people- positive financing as part of a just transition. In the Finance Sector Roadmap, nature- and people-positive financing is defined as finance that makes progress towards halting and reversing nature loss while respecting and protecting the rights of humans who are dependent on or inhabit the land in question. It is a vital part of the path towards a just transition. As defined, nature- and people-positive investments do not include offsetting carbon, biodiversity, or forests.

Potential answers for this indicator:

  • Yes
  • No

Follow us

© 2024 Global Canopy. Registered charity number: 1089110. All rights reserved.

Back to top

Copy link
CopyCopied
Powered by Social Snap