Compare two countries
A buyer choosing between origins is rarely asking which country is riskier. They are asking which one they could actually evidence if something went wrong. That is a comparison, and it is not answerable from either country’s page alone.
Brazil and Indonesia differ on 5 of 8 categories. The rest are the same in both, which is usually because neither has them.
| Evidence category | Brazil | Indonesia |
|---|---|---|
| Legal identity Does the company exist, and who owns it? | Records held | No records |
| Labour Findings of forced or degrading labour. | Records held | No records |
| Environmental Enforcement, embargoes, deforestation. | Records held | No records |
| Corruption & debarment Sanctions, debarment, admissions. | Records held | No records |
| International sanctions US, EU and UN restrictive measures. | Records held | Records held |
| Land & geography Property boundaries and where production happened. | No records | No records |
| Facilities Which plants are authorised to export. | Records held | No records |
| Trade flow What the company exports, and to where. | Records held | Records held |
Read a difference carefully. A filled cell means we hold records of that kind, not that suppliers there are better behaved. An empty one means we hold none — which may be because nobody publishes them, or because we could not obtain them, or because we have not looked. Each country page says which, and what was tried.
The written assessments
The grid is a summary. What each country’s records actually establish, and where they stop, is on its own page.
- Brazil — Brazil publishes an unusually large amount of company-level public record in machine-readable form: federal labour and corruption registers, environmental embargoes, and a national rural property registry.
- Indonesia — Indonesia is a priority jurisdiction for assessment because of its role in palm, timber, rubber, cocoa, coffee, and nickel supply chains.