2. Executive Summary
GHG Emissions Accounting
Figure 4 illustrates the level of emissions disclosure compared with 2010.
2011 sees an increase in the number of respondents disclosing emissions across all categories compared with 2010. This is encouraging as it confirms an increasing number of companies are measuring their emissions.
Of particular interest is the increase in disclosure of Scope 3 emissions (up 62% year on year). Scope 3 emissions are more difficult to ascertain, so the increase in disclosure by respondents here is welcomed. Respondents listed Scope 3 emission sources, including but not limited to, those associated with:
• business travel;
• purchased goods and services (covering cradle to gate emissions);
• transportation and distribution (covering inbound and outbound transport);
• use of sold products; • waste generated in operations; and • employee commuting.
The collaboration between respondents and other parties such as suppliers and employees, when gathering information relating to emissions, gives a sense of ‘working together’ towards better emissions reporting. This is seen as a positive step because an improved level of information will enable more targeted efforts towards climate change mitigation.
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Reporting
Respondents are asked to report their emissions using the GHG Protocol that distinguishes between:
Scope 1: Direct emissions arising from sources owned or controlled by the company.
Scope 2: Indirect emissions arising from the generation of electricity purchased by the company.
Scope 3: Indirect emissions that result from the company’s activities but occur from sources not owned or controlled by the company.
For more detail on GHG reporting, see Additional Understanding on page 32.
Emissions Performance
Activities and Targets Virtually all respondents disclose that they engage in emission reduction activities. This is extremely positive; however, the measurable effects of such activities are difficult to assess without the inclusion of emissions reduction targets. Only 56% of respondents disclosed that they have emission reduction targets in place.
Verification
As the level of market disclosure on climate change increases, so does the importance of having emissions verified by an independent third party. In 2011, only 6 (19%) respondents had their Scope 1 emissions independently verified in accordance with a verification/assurance standard that meets CDP criteria, reducing to 4 (14%) for Scope 2 emissions and 2 (6%) for Scope 3 emissions.
Governance
Figure 5 illustrates governance related responses compared with 2010.
Generally Figure 5 paints a strong picture that respondents acknowledge the importance of proper governance to addressing climate change in their business. There is still a strong focus on responsibility lying with the Board.
Many other respondents noted that responsibility lay with Senior Executives as opposed to Board level. There is a notable increase in the number of respondents who provide incentives to their employees to address climate change (half of respondents in 2011).
See page 33 for additional information on the importance of verification.
Figure 5: Governance Related Responses Compared with 2010
10 15 20 25 30
0 5
23
23 16 11
Assigned board responsibilty
Provide individual incentives
Participate in policy development
Voluntary communication on climate change
13
25 21 16
2011 2010
24
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40