EMPTY STATE
COMPARISON TOOL

Shenzhou Int. 1/100

(HKG:2313) 19 of 20 (2016)

Shenzhou International Group Holdings Ltd. (Shenzhou International) places second-to-last on the benchmark, underperforming across all thematic areas relative to its peers. The company's ranking reflects poor transparency and disclosure on its approach to managing human trafficking and forced labor risks in its supply chain. As a large clothing manufacturer, Shenzhou International has a major opportunity to improve by establishing and disclosing commitments and standards for addressing forced labor and human trafficking in its supply chain, tracing its supply chain and conducting supply chain forced labor risk assessments, and establishing a process to monitor its suppliers on compliance with its supply chain standards and disclosing outcomes of this process.

DOWNLOAD SCORECARD

1 /100

2016 Ranking: 19 of 20

HOW DO THEY COMPARE?

The comparison tool allows companies’ results to be easily compared. Up to three companies can be selected and compared against each other as shown below.

You have selected a maximum of 3 data points to compare. Remove one data point to add a new one.

loading...

1

Shenzhou International was evaluated both in 2016, when it ranked 19th out of 20 companies, and in 2018, when it ranked 38th out of 43 companies. Since 2016, the company has taken limited additional steps to strengthen its performance and disclosure, such as disclosing some information on its purchasing practices.

METHODOLOGY

3

The average score for the sector was 37/100 compared to 49/100 in 2016. The number of companies assessed in 2018 increased from 20 to 43. Since 2016, the methodology has been strengthened, making it more difficult for companies to achieve the same score. The 19 companies benchmarked in both 2016 and 2018 saw their average score increase from 49/100 to 56/100, which is significant given the changes to the methodology.

2018 BENCHMARK

2016

1

Shenzhou International was evaluated both in 2016, when it ranked 19th out of 20 companies, and in 2018, when it ranked 38th out of 43 companies. Since 2016, the company has taken limited additional steps to strengthen its performance and disclosure, such as disclosing some information on its purchasing practices.

METHODOLOGY

2018

3

The average score for the sector was 37/100 compared to 49/100 in 2016. The number of companies assessed in 2018 increased from 20 to 43. Since 2016, the methodology has been strengthened, making it more difficult for companies to achieve the same score. The 19 companies benchmarked in both 2016 and 2018 saw their average score increase from 49/100 to 56/100, which is significant given the changes to the methodology.

2018BENCHMARK

THEME AND INDICATOR SCORE

The benchmark methodology has seven themes, selected to capture the key areas where companies need to take action to eradicate forced labor from their supply chains. There are a total of 22 indicators across the seven themes. For each theme, a company can score a total of 100 points.

Commitment and Governance

The company's top-level commitments on forced labor, supply chain standards, management processes, training programs and stakeholder engagement

OVERALL 10
INDICATORS
Awareness and Commitment
50
Supply Chain Standards
0
Management and Accountability
0
Training
0
Stakeholder Engagement
0

Traceability and Risk Assessment

The extent to which the company traces its supply chain and conducts forced labor risk assessments, and discloses information about these processes.

OVERALL 0
Traceability
0
Risk Assessment
0

Purchasing Practices

The company's awareness and action on purchasing practices that can exacerbate forced labor risks, and its process for selecting suppliers, integrating standards into contracts and cascading them down the supply chain.

OVERALL 0
Purchasing Practices
0
Supplier Selection
0
Integration into Supplier Contracts
0
Cascading Standards through the Supply Chain
0

Recruitment

The company's approach to reducing exploitation by recruitment agencies and eliminating workers' payment of fees for their jobs.

OVERALL 0
Recruitment Approach
0
Recruitment Fees
0
Recruitment Audits
0

Worker Voice

The extent to which the company proactively communicates with workers through the supply chain, enables freedom of association and ensures access to effective and trusted grievance mechanisms.

OVERALL 0
INDICATORS
Communication of Policies
0
Worker Voice
0
Worker Empowerment
0
Grievance Mechanism
0

Monitoring

The company's process for auditing (including whether it includes non-scheduled visits, document review, worker interviews) and disclosure about the audit process and findings.

OVERALL 0
Auditing Process
0
Audit Disclosure
0

Remedy

The extent to which the company has corrective action plans for non-compliant factories, as well as processes for remedying workers who are victims of forced labor, and reports on remedies provided.

OVERALL 0
Corrective Action Plans
0
Remedy Programs
0

Access Benchmark Data

Access the underlying data and non-scored information in a spreadsheet for ease of comparison or download all the scorecards.

DOWNLOAD