“Continuous Improvement” in Illegal Practices in the Peruvian Forest Sector

The report analyzes 855 Visual Inspection Certificates and 2,364 Forest Transport Permits (GTFs) from the Port of Callao in 2015 to trace the supply chain of Peruvian timber. It finds that a significant portion of exports are high-risk or illegal, with exporters strategically directing 'red list' timber to countries with weak import laws, such as China and Mexico, while sending 'green list' timber to the US and EU. The study highlights a shift toward using Forest Permits in Indigenous Communities and Local Forests to circumvent oversight, as these modalities often lack supervision or exhibit high rates of illegality.

• A substantial portion of Peruvian timber exports are high-risk or lack verifiable legal status; 66% of the analyzed GTFs were either not supervised by OSINFOR or lacked the harvest period of the Forest Management Plan (FMP), making legal determination impossible.
• Exporters appear to use the SIGOSFC transparency tool to segment their markets based on the destination country's legality laws, sending high-risk 'red list' timber to countries with fewer restrictions and low-risk 'green list' timber to the US and Europe.
• China and Mexico are primary destinations for high-risk timber, with 71% and 75% of supervised exports to these countries, respectively, appearing on the 'red list'.
• There is a documented shift in harvest modalities used for illegal timber; since 2013, there has been a significant increase in the use of GTFs from Local Forests and Forest Permits in Indigenous Communities.
• Local Forests are particularly prone to fraud, with 96% of supervised FMPs from this modality in the 2015 Callao export data found to have legal violations.
• Indigenous communities are frequently exploited by third parties who use their forest permits to launder illegal timber, leaving the communities to face fines and sanctions.
• Six companies accounted for over 50% of the GTFs analyzed, with Maderera Bozovich SAC being the largest exporter at 17.55%.
• The report identifies specific 'continuous improvement' tactics used by companies to evade transparency, including using documentation from areas not subject to OSINFOR oversight and omitting the 'zafra' (harvest season) from GTFs.

APA

Gómez, R. N., & Sky, M. B. (2017). “Continuous Improvement” in Illegal Practices in the Peruvian Forest Sector. Center for International Environmental Law. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/EnglishVersionFinal.pdf

Chicago

Gómez, Rolando Navarro, and Melissa Blue Sky. “Continuous Improvement” in Illegal Practices in the Peruvian Forest Sector. Center for International Environmental Law, 2017. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/EnglishVersionFinal.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Gómez |first1=Rolando Navarro |last2=Sky |first2=Melissa Blue |title=“Continuous Improvement” in Illegal Practices in the Peruvian Forest Sector |publisher=Center for International Environmental Law |date=2017 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/EnglishVersionFinal.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{gmez2017continuous, author = {Gómez, Rolando Navarro and Sky, Melissa Blue}, title = {{“Continuous Improvement” in Illegal Practices in the Peruvian Forest Sector}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2017}, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/EnglishVersionFinal.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }