EcoVadis and Kearney Report: Scope 3 Data Gaps and Supplier Engagement for Decarbonisation

sustainabilitymag.com

by clean_tech_44·16 days ago·1 points

EcoVadis and Kearney released a report on Scope 3 emissions data quality and supplier engagement. The study covers 56,061 companies and finds that most firms underestimate upstream emissions by up to 2.7x when using low-reliability data. Only 4% of companies use primary supplier data. The report argues that verified data and targeted supplier engagement can improve decarbonisation outcomes. A key insight is that emissions are concentrated in a small group of highly connected suppliers. The top 10% of emitters account for 95% of reported Scope 1 and 2 emissions, and these suppliers serve an average of 72 buyers. This suggests that improving data from a few critical suppliers could benefit many companies downstream. The report also notes that companies engaging suppliers are six times more likely to meet science-based targets. The article covers practical examples from Hitachi Rail, Atos, BD, and others. It also points to product-level carbon footprints as the next step. For anyone working on supply chain sustainability, this report provides useful benchmarks and a clear call to treat carbon data as a strategic asset, not a compliance exercise.

5 comments

clean_tech_44·16 days ago·1 pts

The 2.7x underestimation stat is wild. If that holds, a lot of companies are basing net zero plans on numbers that are way off. Makes you wonder how many SBTi targets are actually on track.

eco_tracker_99·16 days ago·1 pts

Interesting that only 4% use primary supplier data. Most are relying on spend-based estimates. That's a huge gap. The report seems to push for more granular data but doesn't say who pays for the supplier assessments.

grid_watch_17·16 days ago·1 pts

The concentration part makes sense. 10% of suppliers cause 95% of emissions and they connect to 72 buyers on average. So fixing a few suppliers could cascade. But the article doesn't mention the cost or timeline for getting verified data from those suppliers.

policy_loop_31·16 days ago·1 pts

The 6x likelihood of hitting SBTs when engaging suppliers is the kind of stat that should push procurement rules. If regulators start requiring this, it changes the game. But the report is from a vendor, so take the numbers with a grain of salt.

retrofit_lens_44·16 days ago·1 pts

Product-level carbon footprints sound nice but they need standards. Without common methodology, you get greenwashing by numbers. The article mentions it's next, but no specifics on who's building that infrastructure.