The Forests & Finance Blog

APRIL’s Links with Supplier in Borneo Undercut “No Deforestation” Pledge

October 9, 2020 // Read More

KPMG “assurance” reports called into question by new findings   Jakarta, Indonesia: Today a coalition of civil society organizations published a report about deforestation and peatlands degradation on the rainforest-rich island of Borneo in Southeast Asia. Based on analysis using satellite imagery, the report documents significant deforestation, including clearance of forests on peatlands, in the […]

JPMC Commits to Align with Paris Climate Accord; Watchdog Group Warns Commitment Falls Far Short

October 7, 2020 // Read More

Following years of campaigning against world’s largest banker of climate chaos, Rainforest Action Network responds to news of company’s Paris Alignment commitment SAN FRANCISCO, CA — In response to the news of JPMorgan Chase’s announcement that it will align with the Paris Climate Agreement, Rainforest Action Network’s climate and energy program director, Paddy McCully, issued […]

How Morgan Stanley is linked to deforestation in the Amazon

September 22, 2020 // Read More

by André Campos – Repórter Brasil, Piero Locatelli – Repórter Brasil on 16 September 2020 Increasing deforestation in the Amazon in 2020 has prompted banks and funds to promise changes in investments that affect the region. Nordea, the largest asset management company in the Nordic countries, announced the withdrawal of all its investments from JBS, […]

Royal Golden Eagle Group Links Global Brands and Financiers to Deforestation In the Leuser Ecosystem

September 21, 2020 // Read More

RGE palm oil arm APICAL caught sourcing from notorious forest destroyer Rainforest Action Network (RAN) field investigators have uncovered connections between major brands and banks, including Colgate-Palmolive, Nestlé, Mondelēz, Unilever, Kao and Japanese megabank MUFG as well as Dutch bank ABN AMRO and Chinese bank ICBC and the destruction of critical habitat of Sumatran elephants […]

Chase’s Big Rainforest Problem

September 15, 2020 // Read More

The mega bank is the world’s biggest fossil fuel funder — its track record on deforestation is not much better posted by Hana Heineken We all know JPMorgan Chase is the largest funder of fossil fuels, and is the leading banker of climate chaos, by a long shot. But did you know that Chase’s reckless […]

Largest US Investors Undermine Efforts to Halt Rainforest Destruction, new report finds

September 15, 2020 // Read More

Rainforests face unprecedented fires, yet BlackRock, State Street and Vanguard have consistently voted in favor of deforestation, finds new Friends of the Earth Report.  WASHINGTON — As rainforests across the tropics face another year of devastating fires, a new report from Friends of the Earth shows that largest U.S. asset managers, BlackRock, State Street and […]

Banks Financing Conglomerate with Largest Connection to Indonesia’s Annual Fires and Haze Crisis, Analysis Reveals

September 14, 2020 // Read More

The conglomerate Sinar Mas Group also received the most financing of any company in the forest-risk commodity sector, receiving USD 20 billion in credit (2015-Q120) FULL MEDIA BRIEFER AVAILABLE HERE. San Francisco –– New analysis reveals that International brands and banks play a critical role in fueling the annual fire and haze crisis in Indonesia […]

methodology FAQ

methodology

This project assesses the financial services received by over 300 companies directly involved in the beef, soy, palm oil, pulp and paper, rubber and tropical timber (“forest-risk sector”) supply chains, whose operations may impact natural tropical forests in Southeast Asia, Central and West Africa, and Brazil.

Financial Databases Bloomberg, Refinitiv (formerly known as Thomson EIKON), TradeFinanceAnalytics, and IJGlobal), company reports (annual, interim, quarterly) and other company publications, company register filings, as well as media and analyst reports were used to identify corporate loans and underwriting facilities provided to the selected companies for the period 2013-2020 (April). Investments in bonds and shares of the selected companies were identified through Refinitiv, Thomson EMAXX and Bloomberg at the most recently available filing date in April 2020.

The BNDES Transparency portal and Brazil’s Central Bank portal were used to identify additional financial flows to forest-risk companies in Brazil.

 

This research provides a deal-level dataset of specific relationships between selected companies and any linked financial institution. Of the more than 300 companies researched, only 230 companies had identifiable financing where the financier, financing amount, and start date were known within the period of study.

Companies with business activities outside of the forest-risk sector had recorded amounts reduced to more accurately present the proportion of financing that can be reasonably attributed to the forest-risk sector operations of the selected company (see Adjusters). Where available financial information did not specify the purpose of investment or receiving division within the parent company group, reduction factors were individually calculated by comparing a company’s forest-risk sector activities relative to its parent group total activities. Further adjusters were calculated for companies operating in multiple geographies within the scope of this research.

The commercial banks identified in this study were evaluated to determine the strength of any publicly available policies relevant to tropical forest-risk sector investment decision-making, and subsequently scored against a range of criteria incorporating environmental, social and governance standards. Each of the major banks was allocated a score on the scope of its policies and its environmental and social standards. The Forests & Finance Bank Policy Assessment Methodology is based on the Fair Finance Guide (FFG) with a focus on the forest-risk sector. See the Bank Policy Matrix 2018 for more details of the scoring criteria and compiled scores.

The data and assessments presented in this website have not been provided by or authorized by any of the financial institutions or clients concerned. While every attempt has been made to research and present data and assessments accurately and objectively, it is difficult to guarantee complete accuracy. This is not least because of the lack of consistency and transparency in how financial institutions and forest-risk sector clients record key financial and company information. Where there has been ambiguity in source information of financial services, the authors of this website have acted cautiously, resulting in a likely underestimation of the true amounts of finance involved. The authors are committed to correcting any identified errors at the earliest opportunity.

Timeline of updates to the database and bank policy assessments:

Sept 2016: First version of bank policy assessments and database launched, assessing financial services provided to 50 companies for their forest-risk sector production and primary processing activities.

June 2017: Database expanded to cover over 180 companies. Methodology revised to cover entire forest-risk sector supply chains, including trading and manufacturing

December 2018: Database updated and expanded to cover over 190 companies. Bank policy assessments completed for over 30 banks with updated ESG assessment criteria.

November 2019: Dataset updated with financing information for over 100 companies up to August 2019.

September 2020: Dataset updated and expanded to cover not only Southeast Asia, but also Central &West Africa, and Brazil. The new dataset includes two additional sectors: beef and soy, and now covers over 300 of the largest forest-risk commodity companies. (see Methodology).

faq

01. What is the geographical scope of the dataset?

The dataset provides information on the financiers of 300+ forest-risk commodity companies with operations in tropical forest countries, in the three main global rainforest basins: Southeast Asia, Central and West Africa and Brazil.

02. Which countries are included under Southeast Asia?

Myanmar, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam.

03. Which countries are included under Central and West Africa?

Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Ivory Coast, Ghana and Nigeria.

04. Why does the dataset cover Brazil and not the entire Amazon?

It is our aim to expand the dataset to cover the entire Amazon. However, we have chosen to prioritise Brazil, as this country contains the largest part of the Amazon (62%) and is responsible for over 80% of the Amazon forest loss between 2000 and 2017.

But the Amazon is not the only biome under threat. The expansion of soy actually occurs mostly in the Cerrado, and pulp and paper companies have a strong impact on the Mata Atlântica. To address these impacts, and to address leakage of activities from one biome to the other, a holistic approach is required. This is why we have also mapped the finance to forest-risk companies in other biomes in Brazil.

05. What is the basis of the financial information included in the website?

Financial databases Refinitiv (formerly known as Thomson EIKON), Bloomberg IJGlobal, TradeFinanceAnalytics, company register filings, as well as publicly available company reports, were used to identify corporate loans, credit and underwriting facilities provided to the selected companies in the period 2013-2020 (April). Investments in bonds and shares of the selected companies were identified through Refinitiv  and Bloomberg at the most recently available filing date in April 2020. These financial databases provide access to real time market data, news, fundamental data, analytics, trading and messaging tools. The BNDES Transparency portal and Brazil’s Central Bank portal were used to identify additional financial flows to forest-risk companies in Brazil. Please see the Methodology for further information.

06. What was the rationale for selecting the 300+ company groups?

The 300+ company groups selected for this study are involved in the supply chains of the beef, soy, pulp and paper, palm oil, rubber or timber sectors in Southeast Asia, Central & West Africa and Brazil – collectively referred to as ‘tropical forest-risk sectors’. This list is intended to be a representative sample of companies impacting or having the potential to impact tropical forests, and is not an exhaustive list of all companies impacting tropical forests. Other factors that led to their selection include the size of the company and land area of operation, access to information on their financing, and known negative impacts of their operations on tropical forests. Please see the Methodology for further information.

07. Are all of these companies engaged in harmful operations?

Not all of the companies selected for the website are engaged in harmful operations. However, all are engaged in large scale operations in tropical forest regions that have a high risk of causing deforestation and associated social impacts. Banks that do business with these companies are therefore highly exposed to deforestation risks.

08. Why is Suzano the main recipient of finance and why is it considered a forest-risk commodity company?

Suzano is the world’s largest pulp producer, and has received roughly one fifth of the total financing to the tropical forest-risk commodity sector between 2013 and April 2020. The pulp and paper sector is very capital intensive, as new pulp mill construction costs can run into the billions of dollars. In addition, Suzano went through a large merger (with competitor Fibria, in 2018), for which it got additional finance. Due to this combination of factors, it is listed as the largest single recipient of credit.

Most of Suzano’s operations are not located in the Amazon, but in the Cerrado or the Mata Atlântica biomes, which are very biodiverse biomes and equally require protection. In Brazil, the pulp and paper industry generally uses already converted pastures, to expand eucalyptus plantations on. This means the companies don’t play a major role in direct deforestation or land degradation. However, due to the sheer size of land that the pulp industry requires (some 100,000 ha of plantations per mill), the companies do cause competition for land. By buying up pasture land, they are pushing cattle ranchers to new frontiers such as the Amazon in their search for new, cheap land, thus contributing indirectly to deforestation.

09. What is the “Brazil Agriculture Finance Program”?

This is a program through which banks provide the rural sector with subsidised credit – “crédito rural” in Portuguese. Publicly available data about this program discloses the amounts disbursed per bank, per state and per sector, but it does not disclose the name of the recipients. The recipients have therefore been grouped together under the name “Brazil Agriculture Finance Program”.

10. What does “Small-scale Agricultural Operators Brazil” mean?

The database includes over 16,000 small-scale forest-risk companies that received finance from the Brazilian Development Bank BNDES. To simplify the search options, these have been grouped together as “Small-scale Agricultural Operators Brazil”. For information about all the recipients, you can download the full dataset.

11. Why is the value of finance for the soy sector relatively low?

The methodology we used relies on publicly available data, like company reports and data available in financial databases, which often refers to syndicated loans. For the soy sector, the big traders themselves finance a significant portion of the harvest, and this is not covered by our data.

 

12. Why are the total values for finance to companies operating in Central and West Africa relatively low?

The methodology we used relies on publicly available data, like company reports and data available in financial databases. Many of the actors that drive deforestation in Central and West Africa do not require large syndicated financing that is usually recorded in the financial databases. Moreover, they are not listed companies and the company registers in the relevant jurisdiction to not make sufficiently detailed company level data available. This makes access to information on financial relationships more difficult to obtain when compared to companies that are either listed or are registered in countries where company registers provide detailed company information. Additionally, many companies active in Central and West Africa also obtain finance from sources that are not covered by this dataset, such as from individual financiers.

 

13. How was the bank policy assessment conducted?

For our assessment of bank policies, we selected 31 out of 35 financial institutions with the most significant financial exposure to the forest-risk sector in Southeast Asia. The assessments were based only on publicly available information, and each bank was given an opportunity to comment on the draft assessment prior to publication. The assessment scores the bank on the scope of its policy implementation and the environmental, social and governance standards that are expected of their clients. The scores are out of a total of 50 points.

The last policy assessment update was done in 2018. The next policy assessment update will be published in 2021, and will also cover financial institutions that operate in Brazil and Central and West Africa.

14. When will the bank policy assessment be updated?

In early 2021 we will publish an updated and expanded bank and investor policy assessment.

15. What’s the difference between the Forests & Finance policy assessment and that of other policy assessment tools?

15.1 Environmental Paper Network Red Lines?

The Red Lines assessment is global, whereas the Forests & Finance assessment focuses on companies operating in Southeast Asia; The Red Lines assessment is focused on the pulp and paper industry, whereas forestsandfinance.org covers 4 forest-risk commodities (palm oil, pulp & paper, timber and rubber; and the Red Lines assessment does not give banks a score for their policies, whereas forestsandfinance.org does.

15.2 Forest 500?

The Forests & Finance policy assessment has more detailed criteria related to deforestation and the protection of human rights, labour rights and traditional people’s rights. Forest 500 has more detailed criteria on the scope of policies, on their implementation at the Financial Institution level and on reporting on them.

15.3 Fair Finance Guide?

The Fair Finance Guide only covers Financial Institutions in 14 countries. This includes Indonesia, Brazil and Japan, but does not include Malaysia, China or the US, countries whose banks play a big role in the financing of deforestation-risk commodities. The Forests & Finance methodology is based on that of the Fair Finance Guide, but includes more “shalls” than “shoulds”. Forests & Finance also has more detailed criteria on biodiversity protection, labour protection, respect for international conventions and tax structures. The Fair Finance Guide includes a requirement for FSC certification, where Forests & Finance requires “credible certification”, and Fair Finance Guide has more detailed criteria on reporting and on chain of custody policies that companies should implement.

16. What can investors do to stop deforestation?

Investors can take a two-pronged approach by addressing 1) the companies directly engaged in tropical forest-risk sectors and 2) the banks financing those companies. For both types of companies, investors should demand full disclosure of risks and application of robust ESG standards and due diligence processes. See page 4 of the Forests & Finance Brochure for more recommendations for investors.

17. What can I do if my bank is financing companies included on the website?

As a first step, we recommend you check whether the bank has any policies governing their financing of tropical forest-risk sectors. Our evaluation of major bank’s policies is available here. If your bank is not included in this evaluation, you could check your bank’s website or ask them directly what policies they have in place to protect forests and people through forest-sector lending. Depending on their response, you might want to ask them to implement a policy, or you might want to find an alternative bank. Our research finds that banks with policies are still financing companies linked to deforestation. Therefore, having a policy is not a guarantee of responsible financing, but may indicate the bank is engaging their clients to improve their performance, or, they may be failing to make sure their policies are being implemented by clients. You are welcome to contact us at info@forestsandfinance.org if you require further assistance.

18. Who are the organizations that are hosting this website?

Forestsandfinance.org is a joint project of the Forests and Finance Coalition, which includes Rainforest Action Network, Tuk Indonesia, Profundo, Amazon Watch, Repórter Brasil and BankTrack. Click on the organization name for more information on what we do individually.