Positioning – Fibria
Corporate

Positioning

Fibria encourages constant dialogue with its stakeholders and adopts a policy of transparency in its relationships.

Our positioning on topics of relevance to our business and to society follow.

Diversity

Fibria believes that a diversity of people, experiences and cultures enriches ideas, relationships and business solutions. The practice of diversity and inclusion of genders, ethnicities and beliefs benefits companies and helps them to attain optimal results in all aspects.

This topic is not new to Fibria, which always has striven to combat discrimination and prejudice, supported by its Code of Conduct. Fibria believes that each person is unique in their value and potential. Differences teach and create new ideas and experiences, and the first step is to believe in them. Based on this conviction, the company drafted the following positioning:

“Fibria cultivates diversity by valuing differences and promoting opportunities guided by a culture of meritocracy, recognizing that people are unique and achieve better results for everyone when they work together.”

Click here to learn more about diversity.

GMOs

Fibria is part of the initiative sponsored by The Forest Dialogue (TFD) dedicated to fostering dialogue on topics related to genetically modified organisms (GMO), working alongside other global companies. In line with its transparency policy, Fibria also has agreed to make public its answers on the TFD website.

Since the 1990s, Fibria has conducted research into genetically modified (GM) eucalyptus in a controlled environment and, in 2011, it began field experiments, always in accordance with Brazilian law. The goal is to improve the yields of the forests planted by the company and the quality of the wood produced.

Fibria is currently in the experimental analysis (research only) phase of the GM eucalyptus technology, seeking to verify in the field the potential benefits, risks and impacts of this new technology for the company and for society in general. Aware of its responsibility, Fibria has no specific plans to use GM eucalyptus in its planted forests until the studies produce conclusive findings on the above aspects.

Fibria knows that, in addition to the applicable legal authorizations, it must engage various parts of society to incorporate their concerns into the process. That is why the company invited academia, NGOs and consultants from various fields to assess the environmental and social impacts of this technology through a multidisciplinary working group, which is a pioneering initiative in this area.

Information on GMOs is available at the National Biosafety Technical Commission (CTNBio). In addition, Fibria is available to answer any questions and receive suggestions via the e-mail biotecnologia@fibria.com.br.

While accompanying the latest advances in biotechnology, Fibria continues to invest in traditional enhancements of cultivation methods to identify benefits for its operations as well as for society in general by reducing its use of natural resources, such as land, water and nutrients to produce pulp and other biomass by-products.

To read Fibria’s Policy on Genetically Modified Eucalyptus, click here.

Click here for more information on this subject.

Vacant Public Land

In November 2013, the Federal Prosecution Office (MPF) in São Mateus, Espírito Santo filed a public interest civil action against Fibria, the State of Espírito Santo and the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES) seeking annulment of the instruments the government issued to grant domain of the land to Aracruz Celulose, claiming the land is “vacant public land.” The action refers to 6,238 hectares of land granted in the 1970s to Aracruz Celulose, which was merged into Votorantim Celulose e Papel in 2009 and ultimately became Fibria.

The MPF/ES requests that the land once again become public property and, once the traditional occupation of these areas by Quilombolas is demonstrated, that title to the lands be granted to the communities of São Mateus and Conceição da Barra.

Fibria contests the action because it understands the land is subject to possession rights; therefore, they should not be considered vacant public lands.

The land in question was acquired in the early 1970s, more specifically between 1973 and 1975 – that is, over 40 years ago, when the federal government had in place a policy for expansion and development of the local economy, particularly for the growth of manufacturers.

These manufacturers included pulp producers, which were covered by the National Pulp and Paper Program, whose purpose was to develop Brazil’s industrial sector and ensure the country’s self-sufficiency in such products. The program’s actions included fostering the integration between forest and industrial operations in territorial and businesses terms, seeking to avoid the inefficient use of forest resources and to minimize the costs of the commercial exploration, transportation and production of pulp and paper. One way to reach these goals was to expand planted forest areas, which gave rise to a globally competitive pulp and paper industry that not only satisfied domestic demand, but also became one of the country’s leading exports sectors.

In line with the program, the then Aracruz invested heavily in Espírito Santo state and acquired several rural properties to create its forestry base. These properties were subject to right of private possession, i.e., they could be acquired by the company, and were not vacant public land. The process for legal entities to put lands in good standing would take considerable time (probably years) to be concluded, and the intended investments would certainly be rendered unfeasible. The process to acquire land had to be accelerated in order to comply with government requirements. In some cases, to transfer possession, individuals resorted to procedures that were common and accepted by government agencies at the time. The lands initially were claimed in the name of employees who, very transparently, informed that the acquired lands were intended for the reforestation projects of the company, therefore not disguising their purpose. All agencies involved were fully aware of how the process worked, and eventually it was approved by the state government. During all this time, the company held peaceable possession of these areas which, until the action was filed, were not questioned in any way.

As for the quilombola communities that live in northern Espírito Santo state, which were mentioned in the action brought by the MPF/ES, Fibria has been seeking to engage in dialogue and to contribute to the development of these communities through programs that create jobs and income. Meanwhile, the company has been discussing with the communities and other actors permanent solutions to the situation that include not only the definition of areas, but also means and resources for their social, economic and environmental development.

You may also be interested in these