Country · sector · product
Risk Matrix
Compare sourcing origins, inspect the evidence and record what still needs verification.
Applied comparison · Onboarding
soya · Agriculture & Food
Swipe the table to compare all origins →
| Assessment | BoliviaBOL |
|---|---|
| Country contextPublished composite rating | Severe7/7 dimensions with data |
| Sector-adjusted contextModel inputs and coverage | High6/6 inputs observed |
| Product evidenceObservations matching the requested product | No rated match1 matching observations |
| Broader sector evidenceApplies to sector context, not the specific product | Moderate1 sector observations |
| Evidence coverageA coverage gap is not a low-risk finding | Product evidence1 subject-specific observation matched the requested commodity or product. |
| Review requirement | Targeted verification is indicated before relying on this sourcing route.2 sources · evidence version 9 Oct 2026 |
| Inspect origin | Country profile ↗ |
Bands describe different evidence layers and are not added into a supplier score. Source editions differ; review the dated observations below.
Evidence & review
Bolivia
1 subject-specific observation matched the requested commodity or product.
GovernanceSevere
Regulatory enforcement risk is intensified by sector-specific governance deficits (×1.2).
CorruptionSevere
Intensified corruption exposure driven by sector-specific opaque procurement (×1.3), elevating the effective risk rating from high to severe.
Forced LabourSevere
Sector intensified forced labour exposure (×2.0) — jurisdictional forced labour indices include: Brazil nuts/chestnuts, Cattle, Corn and 2 supplementary categories.
EnvironmentalSevere
Sector profile significantly intensified environmental harm risk (×2.5), elevating the effective risk rating from moderate to severe.
Source-linked evidence
2 of 2 observations · Effective and retrieval dates are shown separately.
| Observation | Band & scope | Source & dates | Provenance |
|---|---|---|---|
| DeforestationBroader sector contextValue: 0.41 %/yr | ModerateSector context | World Bank — Forest area indicator ↗Effective: 31 Dec 2023Retrieved: 1 Oct 2026 | Derived by Salient OneMethod: forest-area-trend-1.0Interpretation & limitsS1 relative annual trend derived from World Bank AG.LND.FRST.ZS forest area as a percentage of land area; it is not a Global Forest Watch tree-cover-loss measure. |
| Eudr commoditysoya | Not ratedProduct match | Salient One derived EUDR scope flag ↗Effective: 22 Aug 2026Retrieved: 1 Oct 2026 | Derived by Salient OneMethod: eudr-scope-screen-1.0Interpretation & limitsS1 screening scope flag for soya; the cited regulation defines the relevant commodity scope, while the country–commodity pairing is an internal evidence-review flag. It is not the EU country benchmark or an externally published severity rating. |
Verification checklist
Onboarding · 0/5 done. Checklist status does not change the risk ratings.
- Reconstruct ownership and actual control, including material historical changes and opaque jurisdictions.
Onboarding review
No note recorded.
- Verify licences, banking route, tax or distress signals and the operating facts material to the engagement.
Onboarding review
No note recorded.
- Preserve the approval rationale, evidence dates, limitations, owner and next review trigger.
Onboarding review
No note recorded.
- Obtain production-location and traceability records; verify applicable land-use requirements.
World Bank — Forest area indicator · 2023
No note recorded.
- Screen the supplier and relevant connected parties using verified identifiers.
Country and commodity evidence does not establish a supplier’s sanctions status.
No note recorded.
Saved notes stay in this tab until the session ends. They are included in the Markdown export and excluded from share links. Use your organisation’s approved system for the final decision record.
Explore source coverage by country
This map shows published observation counts. It does not measure risk or establish complete product coverage.
Current evidence coverage
Explore the matrix by country
Colour shows the number of published source-linked observations—not a country risk rating. Select a country to inspect its sectors, commodities and sources.
Hover for coverage · Select a highlighted country to filter the canonical matrix · Empty coverage is not evidence of low risk
Method, source downloads and limits
How to read the comparison
Country bands are published composite ratings. Sector-adjusted bands use the existing sector model only when all required inputs are observed. Product and sector evidence bands show the most elevated matching source observation; they are not combined into a supplier score.
Missing, unsupported and temporarily unavailable evidence are separate states. No match is not evidence of low risk. Verify current primary records and record a supplier-level decision in your approved system.
Full scoring and evidence method →Published source data
Source facts, S1 derivations, effective dates and retrieval dates remain visible in each evidence row.
Project assessment
Continue with project scoping, impacts on people, stakeholder engagement and mitigation. Sourcing observations inform supply-chain questions; project evidence is needed to establish site-specific impacts.
Original S1 prompts referencing the IFC Performance Standards (2012).
Assess a project →What does the S1 Country × Sector Risk Matrix do?
It combines current country context, sector weighting and source-linked commodity or product observations into an evidence-routing brief for supplier due diligence.
Does a sourcing evidence brief approve a supplier?
No. It is a country-, sector- and commodity-level routing aid, not a finding about a supplier, shipment or transaction.