【英文版】估算和报告产品的比较排放影响

WORLD

RESOURCESINSTITUTE

WORKINGPAPER

ESTIMATINGANDREPORTINGTHECOMPARATIVEEMISSIONSIMPACTSOFPRODUCTS

STEPHENRUSSELL

EXECUTIVESUMMARY

▪Thispaperintroducesaneutralframeworkfor

estimatinganddisclosingthegreenhousegas(GHG)emissionsimpactofaproduct(goodorservice),

relativetothesituationwherethatproductdoesnotexist.

.

▪Thedifferencesmaybeeithernegativeorpositive

Positivedifferencesarefrequentlycalled“avoidedemissions”andhavebeentheobjectofmuch

interestamongcompaniestryingtodevelopandpromotelow-carbonproducts.

▪Existingpracticesforestimatingsuchproduct

impactsvaryintermsofmanykeyissues.The

intentoftheframeworkistoidentifyimportant

challenges,harmonizepractices,andimprovethecredibilityofcompanies’claims,includingthroughtheconsiderationofpotentialnegativeimpacts.

-

▪Whenestimatesareusedtoinformdecision

making,theyshouldpreferablybedeveloped

using“consequential”methodsthatmeasuretotal,system-widechangesinemissions.Becausethedataavailabletosupportthesemethodsareoftenlimited,alternative(“attributional”)methodsmayalsobe

consideredasinterimmeasuresforapplications

thatcanbesupportedwithaninterimattributionalapproach.Forallpublicclaimsoncomparative

emissionsimpactsthatmayinvolvemarketeffects,werecommendtheuseoftheconsequentialmethod.

CONTENTS

ExecutiveSummary.......................................1

1.Introduction.............................................3

2.CoreTermsinEstimatingComparativeImpacts...10

3.SettingTargetsforComparativeImpacts............11

4.AccountingIssuesandRecommendations........13

5.SummaryandConclusions..........................20

AppendixA:ConsolidatedRecommendations........21

Endnotes..................................................24

References...............................................25

Acknowledgments.......................................26

AbouttheAuthor.........................................26

WorkingPaperscontainpreliminaryresearch,analysis,findings,andrecommendations.Theyarecirculatedtostimulatetimelydiscussionandcriticalfeedback,andtoinfluenceongoingdebateonemergingissues.Workingpapersmayeventuallybepublishedinanotherformandtheircontentmayberevised.

SuggestedCitation:Russell,Stephen.2018.“EstimatingandReportingtheComparativeEmissionsImpactsofProducts.”

WorkingPaper.Washington,DC:WorldResourcesInstitute.

Availableonlineat

/publication/comparative

-emissions.

WORKINGPAPER|January2019|1

WORLDRESOURCESINSTITUTE

2|

Companiesareincreasinglyinterestedin

estimatingandmakingclaimsabouttheGHGimpactsoftheirproducts,relativetothe

situationwherethoseproductsdonotexist.Thesecomparativeimpactsmaybeestimatedasthesumofallsystem-widechangesinemissionsorremovalsoccurringbecauseoftheproduct(“consequentialestimation

approach”)orasthedifferenceintotallife-cycleGHG

emissionsbetweenacompany’sproductandsome

alternativeproductthatprovidesanequivalentfunction(“attributionalestimationapproach”).Theimpactcanbepositive,suchthatthecompany’sproductreduces

emissionsrelativetothebasecase.Alternatively,the

impactcanbenegative,suchthatthecompany’sproductincreasesemissionsrelativetothebasecase.

Companieshavemostlyfocusedonpositive

impacts,despitethefactthatnegativeimpactsareequallycommonandthatconsiderationofboth

positiveandnegativeimpactsisneededtoguideacompany’sproductportfolioandclimatechange

strategy.Potentialapplicationsoftheseproductcom-

parisonsincludeenhancingproductresearchanddevelop-ment(R&D),improvingcorporatebrandimage,enablingproductdifferentiationforcustomersandinforming

purchasingdecisions,implementingnewbusinessmodels,andinformingpublicpoliciesrelatedtoclimatechange.

Theabsenceofagenerallyacceptedframework

forestimatingandpubliclyreportingcomparativeimpactsconstrainscompanies’abilitytopursue

theseapplications.Withoutcleardirection,many

companiesandindustryinitiativeshaveindependently

developedtheirownmethodologiesorsimplyrefrainedfromestimatingcomparativeimpactsbecauseofconcernsthatclaims(aroundpositiveimpactsspecifically)willbeperceivedasgreenwashing.

WRIresearchedexistingaccountingandreport-ingpracticestoidentifythemostimportant

methodologicalissues.Thiscompriseddeskresearchandinterviewswithover20expertsincompaniesand

nongovernmentalorganizations(NGOs).Itcoveredtheclaimsand/ortargetsofabout350companiesandallthemajorguidancedocumentsandstandardspublishedtodateinEnglish.

Manymethodologicalissuesarekeytothe

relevanceandcredibilityofcomparativeimpact

estimates.Theseissuesincludehowtoidentifywhich

emissionssourcesshouldbeassessedandhowtoidentifycrediblebasecasesagainstwhichacompany’sproducts

canbecompared.Claimingpositiveimpactscanintroduceadditionalcomplexities,suchashowtoapportiontotal

impacttodifferentvalue-chainactorsbasedonestimatedcontributionstothecompany’sproduct(“attribution”);cherry-pickingproductsorproductapplications;and

aggregatingresultsforclaimsatthelevelofproductportfolios.

Considerablevariationinpracticeexistsacross

eachoftheseissues.Whilemostpublishedguidancedocumentsandstandardsforcomparativeimpactsfollowtheattributionalapproachandarebasedonestablishedlife-cycleaccountingapproaches,theyprovidequite

differentspecificationsonmanyissues.Evengreater

variationinpracticesexistsamongindividualcompanies.Littleofthisvariationcanclearlybeascribedtoproduct-orsector-specificconsiderationsorotheridentifiable

reasons.AppendixB(availableonline)providesadetailedcomparisonofpublishedguidancedocuments.

Theconsequentialapproach—suchasthemethod

providedintheGHGProtocolPolicyandActionStandard—directlyaddressesmanyofthe

methodologicalissues.Todate,however,companieshaveusedonlytheattributionalapproachtoestimate

comparativeimpacts.

Usingtheresearchfindings,thispaperoutlinesaneutralframeworkforestimatinganddisclosingbothpositiveandnegativeimpacts.Theframeworkisnotintendedtobeexhaustive,offerdetailedguidance,oraddressissuesspecifictoproductcategories;instead,itaimstoaddressgenericissueslikelytobefrequentlyencounteredwhenassessingcomparativeimpacts.

Theframeworkrecommendstheconsequential

approachwhenevercomparativeimpactestimatesareusedtoinformdecision-makingandwhenevermarketeffectsmediatecomparativeimpacts.

However,thecurrentstateofdataavailabilityandlimitedcompanyresourcesmaymakethisapproachimpracticalformanybusinesses.Thus,whilethispaperstrongly

encouragesuseoftheconsequentialapproachindecision-makingcontexts,theattributionalapproachmaybe

consideredasaninterimmeasureforapplicationsthatitcansupport.

EstimatingandReportingtheComparativeEmissionsImpactsofProducts

Keyprinciplesincludethefollowing:

▪Corporateinventoryaccountingandcomparative

assessmentsarecomplementaryapproachesto

managingacompany’simpactontheclimate,buttheyusefundamentallydifferentmethods.

,

▪Companiesshouldfirstcalculateandreportscope1

2,and3emissionsandsetscience-basedreductiontargetsfortheseemissions.Comparativeassessmentsshouldneithertakeprecedenceovernordetractfromeffortstodoso.

▪Ifacompanyreportspositiveimpacts,itshould

alsoreportacompleteinventoryofscope1,2,and3emissions.Companiesshouldnotmakeclaimsaboutpositiveimpactswithoutbeingtransparentaboutwhethertheirscope1,2,and3emissionsareincreasingordecreasing.

▪Tobeconsistentwiththerequirementsofthe

GHGProtocolcorporateaccountingandreportingstandards,comparativeimpactsshouldnotbe

usedtoadjustscope1,2,and3emissions.Further,comparativeimpactsshouldnotbecomparedwithcorporateGHGinventoriesunless(1)theimpacts

havebeenestimatedforacompany’sentireproductportfoliousingaconsequentialapproachthatcoversnegativeandpositiveimpactsand(2)theGHG

inventoriesarecomprehensiveandconformtoGHGProtocolrequirements.

▪Theaccountingandreportingofcomparativeimpactsshouldadheretothefollowingcriteria:

□Relevance:Ensurethatthecomparativeassess-mentappropriatelyreflectstheGHGeffectsoftheassessedproduct(inrelationtothebasecase)andservesthedecision-makingneedsofusersand

stakeholders.

□Completeness:Includealllife-cycleGHGemis-sions(underanattributionalapproach)orallchangesinemissionsarisingfromtheassessedproduct(consequentialapproach)intheassess-ment.

□Consistency:Useconsistentaccountingap-

proaches,datacollectionmethods,andcalculationmethodsfortheassessedproductandbasecase.

□Transparency:Provideclearandcompletein-formationtoallowstakeholderstoassessthe

credibilityandreliabilityoftheresults,especiallyrelatedtokeymethodologicalissues,suchasthechoiceofthebasecase.

□Accuracy:Reduceuncertaintiesasfaraspossible.

1.INTRODUCTION

Whatisthepurposeofthispaper?

Usingareviewofcurrentpracticesincomparative

assessments,thispaperidentifiesmajoraccounting

issues,evaluatesthecredibilityofexistingpractices,andoutlinesgeneralprinciplesandgoodpracticestoguide

futureaccountingefforts.Theserecommendationsare

notintendedtoserveasexhaustiveordetailedguidance.Thescopeoftheanalysisandrecommendationsisglobal,coveringallgeographicregionsandsectors.

Whoshouldreadthispaper?

Thispaperisprimarilyintendedforcompanies

interestedinestimatingandreportingthecomparativegreenhousegas(GHG)impactsoftheirproducts.It

shouldalsobeusedbyindustryassociationsasabasisfordevelopingsector-specificaccountingandreportingguidance.Additionally,investors,environmentalgroups,policymakers,andacademicscanusethispaperto

learnaboutbestpracticesforestimatinganddisclosingcomparativeGHGimpacts.

Whatistheroleofbusinessinclosingtheglobalemissionsgap?

Tolimitglobaltemperaturerisetobelow2oCand1.5oC

abovepreindustriallevels,GHGemissionsmustbe

reduced20percentand45percent,respectively,from

2010levelsby2030(IPCC2018).Theglobalcommunityisnotcurrentlyonthatemissionstrajectory,withsubstantialgapsbetweenrequiredandcommittedreductionsthrough2030.

Theprivatesectorcanandmustcontributeadditional

reductionstofillthisgap.Itcandoso,forexample,

throughacombinationofbroaderdeploymentofenergy-efficiencyproductsandlow-carbontechnologiesand

productinnovation.Existingenergy-efficiencyand

clean-energytechnologiesmaybesufficienttomeet

interimglobaltargets(e.g.,through2030),althoughtheiradoptionwillhavetobescaledupsignificantly.Innovationisrequiredtomeetlonger-termgoals.Forexample,of

theannualemissionsreductionsneededintheindustrial

WORKINGPAPER|January2019|3

WORLDRESOURCESINSTITUTE

4|

sectorthrough2050,almost30percentwillhavetocomefromtechnologiesthatarenotcommerciallyavailable

today(IEA2015).

Aneffectivecorporateclimatechangestrategyrequires

adetailedunderstandingofacompany’sGHGimpact.

Increasingly,companiesareinterestedinunderstandingwhethertheirproducts(goodsorservices)increaseor

decreaseemissions,relativetootherproductsinthemar-ketplacethatprovideanequivalentfunction.Understand-ingthiscomparativeGHGimpactcanhelpcompanies

identifyandpromoteexistingproductsornewtechnolo-giesthatcanclosetheemissionsgap.

HowarecomparativeproductGHGimpactsestimated?

ComparativeproductGHGimpacts(“comparative

impacts”)foragivenproduct(the“assessedproduct”)canbeestimatedusingeitherattributionalorconsequentialaccountingapproaches.TheseapproachesdifferintermsoftherangeofGHGemissionssourcesincludedinthe

analysisandhowcomparativeimpactsareestimated

(Table1).Researchforthispaperdidnotuncoverany

caseswherecompaniesusedaconsequentialaccount-

ingapproach.Consequentialapproachesare,however,

applicable(seeSection4forrecommendationsonwhenaconsequentialapproachshouldbeused).

Acrossbothattributionalandconsequentialmethods,

positiveimpactsarecommonlyreferredtoas“avoided

emissions,”aswellas“environmentalloadreduction

potential,”“enablingeffects,”and“contributiontosocietalreductions.”Positiveimpactsalsofrequentlyformpartof

companies’“netpositive”targets,whichextendbeyondGHGemissionstoincludenumeroussocialandenviron-mentalimpactcategories.Thispaperoccasionallyuses

theterm“avoidedemissions”toconnotepositiveimpacts,especiallywhenportrayingaspectsofcompanies’targets.

Attributionalapproaches

Attributionalapproachesgenerateinventoriesofabsoluteemissionsandremovalsthatareattributedtoagiven

entity,suchasaproduct,company,city,ornation.Attri-butionallife-cycleaccounting(attributionalLCA)isthe

basisforestimatingcomparativeimpactsusinganattribu-tionalapproach.

Comparativeimpactsareestimatedasthedifference

betweenthetotal,attributional,life-cycleGHGinvento-riesofacompany’sproduct(the“assessed”product)andanalternative(or“reference”)productthatprovidesanequivalentfunction(Figure1).

ComparativeGHGImpact=Life-CycleEmissions

ofReferenceProduct–Life-CycleEmissionsof

AssessedProduct

Ifthecomparativeimpactiszero,theassessedand

referenceproductsemitthesameamountofGHGsovertheirlifecycles.Ifthecomparativeimpactisnegative,theassessedproductemitsmoreoveritslifecyclecomparedtothereferenceproduct.Conversely,ifthecomparativeimpactispositive,theassessedproductemitslessoveritslifecyclecomparedtothereferenceproduct.

Table1|KeyDifferencesbetweenAttributionalandConsequentialAccounting

KEYCHARACTERISTICS

Whatisdescribedormodeled?

Systemboundary

Howisitusedtoestimatecomparativeimpacts?

CONSEQUENTIAL

Changeinemissionsorremovalscausedbyaspecificdecisionoraction

Allandonlytheprocessesthatchangeasaresultofthedecisionstudied,wherevertheymayoccurinthesystem

ThroughconsequentialLCAorpolicyandaction

accounting(i.e.,usingthePolicyandActionStandard)

ATTRIBUTIONAL

Staticinventoryofabsoluteemissionsandremovals

Processesuseddirectlyinthelife-cyclestagesoftheproductphysicallyproducedorconsumed

ThroughcomparisonsofproductGHGinventoriesdevelopedusingattributionallife-cycleaccounting(LCA)

Source:AdaptedfromBranderandAscui2015.

EstimatingandReportingtheComparativeEmissionsImpactsofProducts

Figure1|CalculatingComparativeGHGImpactsUsingtheAttributionalLCAApproach

LIFECYCLEOFREFERENCEPRODUCT

Materialacquisition&Distribution

pre-processingProduction&storageUseEndoflife

LIFECYCLEOFPRIMARYPRODUCT

GHGEMISSIONS

COMPARATIVEGHGIMPACTS

Source:Graphicbyauthors.

Life-cycleanalysesarebuiltontheconceptof

the“functionalunit,”whichestablishesthebasic

referencepointagainstwhichallinputsandoutputsoftheproductsystemcanbeidentifiedandrelated.Theattributionalapproachessentiallygenerates

astaticinventoryoftheabsoluteamountofGHG

emissionsandremovalsthatresultsfromthedeliveryofaspecifiedamountofthefunctionalunit.In

comparativeGHGassessmentstheassessedand

referenceproductsarecomparedusingthesame

functionalunittoensurealike-for-likecomparison.Forexample,tocompareanelectricvehicleand

aconventionalone,thefunctionalunitmightbe

“operatingamedium-sizedautomobilefor200,000kilometersusinganelectricengineversusagasolineengine.”

TheGHGProtocolProductLifeCycleAccounting

andReportingStandard(“ProductStandard”;

WRIandWBCSD2013b)outlinesrequirements

andguidanceforquantifyingandpubliclyreportingproductGHGinventoriesforindividualproducts.

TheProductStandardisexpresslyintendedtohelp

tracktheperformanceofasingleproductovertime.Byitself,itcannotbeusedtoestimatecomparative

GHGimpactsbecauseadditionalaccountingguidanceandrulesareneededtoensurethatthecomparisonsarevalid(seeAppendixAintheProductStandard).TheProductStandarddoes,however,helpshowhowcomparativeassessmentsshouldbeconducted.

OtherexamplesofattributionalGHGaccountingstandardsaretheGHGProtocol’sCorporate

StandardandScope3Standard(seebelow).

Consequentialapproaches

Consequentialmethodsestimatethetotal,system-widechangeinemissionsandremovalsthatresultsfromagivendecisionorintervention,suchasthedecisiontoproduceoneextraunitoftheassessedproductorthe

introductionofanewgovernmentpolicy.ConsequentialLCAandtheGHGProtocolPolicyandActionStandard(WRI2014b;seebelow)areconsequentialmethodsthatcouldbeusedtoestimatecomparativeimpacts.

ConsequentialLCAestimatesthetotal,system-wide

changeinemissionsandremovalsthatoccursastheresultofachangeinoutputofthefunctionalunit,inresponse

to,forexample,changesinproductiontechnology,publicpolicy,orconsumerbehavior.Inthisapproach,processesareincludedinthelife-cycleboundarytotheextentthattheyareexpectedtochangebecauseofachangeinoutput.

ThePolicyandActionStandardestimatescomparativeimpactsbysubtractingemissionsinthepolicyscenariofromthoseofthebaselinescenario,whichrepresentstheeventsorconditionsmostlikelytooccurintheabsenceofthepolicyoractionbeingassessed.ThePolicyandActionStandardcanbeappliedtopolicies,suchaslaws,regula-tions,andincentiveschemes,aswellascorporateactions,suchastheintroductionofanewproductonthemarket.

Underaconsequentialmethod,ifthecomparativeimpactiszero,thereisnonet,system-widechangeinemissionsfromtheincreaseinproductionofagivenproduct.Ifthecomparativeimpactisnegative,thereisanincreasein

system-wideemissions,whereasifthecomparativeimpactispositive,thereisadecreaseinsystem-wideemissions.

ComparativeGHGImpact(PolicyandAction

Standard)=Emissionsinbaselinescenario–

Emissionsinpolicyscenario

WORKINGPAPER|January2019|5

WORLDRESOURCESINSTITUTE

6|

Prosandconsofattributionalandconsequentialapproaches

TheuseofattributionalLCAtoestimatecomparative

impactsimplicitlyassumesperfectsubstitutionofone

productforanotherandthatactivityandemissions

levelsscalelinearlywithproductquantity.Thisapproachassumesthatindirect,market-mediatedeffectsdonot

occur(Table2).Theseeffectsincludereboundeffects,

changesinmarketsizethatoccuroverandaboveany

changesinmarketshare,andchangesinthemarketpriceofinputs.However,thisassumptionisunlikelytoholdformostproductsystems.EmpiricalstudiesshowthatbasingdecisionsonattributionalLCAcanresultinmitigation

actionsthatunintentionallyincreaseratherthandecreaseemissions(e.g.,Searchingeretal.2008;Herteletal.

2010).Incontrast,consequentialapproachesexplicitlyaccountforsuchmarket-mediatedeffects.

Attributionalandconsequentialapproachesalsodifferintheirlevelsofuncertainty.Theuncertaintyofattributionalestimatesismainlyparametric(i.e.,aroundactivity

levelsandemissionsfactors).Incontrast,consequentialaccountinginvolvesnotonlyparametricuncertaintybutalsoscenariouncertaintyrelatedtohowanewtechnologyaffectstheuseoftheincumbenttechnology,aswellas

theinteractionsofthesetechnologieswiththebroader

economy.Whilethereisthereforegreateruncertainty

associatedwithconsequentialaccounting,thisisnota

disadvantagebecauseattributionalestimatesarebasedonsimplemodelsthatexcludemarket-mediatedeffects.

Onedisadvantageoftheconsequentialapproach,however,istherelativelackofavailableinputdataandemissions

factors,whichoftenmakestheapproachmorelabor-

intensive.Thisdisadvantageisexpectedtodiminishovertimeasdatabasesforconsequentiallife-cycleemissionsfactorsbecomelarger.

Choosingbetweenattributionalandconsequentialapproaches

AsdiscussedinSection4,theconsequentialapproach

ismoreappropriateforinformingdecision-making,butthecurrentstateofdataavailabilityandlimitedcompanyresourcesmaymeanthattheapproachisnotapracticableoptionformanycompanies.Thus,whilethispaper

stronglyencouragestheuseoftheconsequentialapproachindecision-makingcontextsandforcomparativeimpactsthatinvolvemarketeffects,theattributionalapproach

maybeusedasaninterimsolutionforapplicationsthatcanbesupportedwithaninterimattributionalapproach.

Table2|AdvantagesandDisadvantagesofAttributionalLCAandConsequentialApproachesto

EstimatingComparativeImpacts

ACCOUNTINGAPPROACH

Attributional

CONS

Ignoresmarket-mediatedeffects

PROS

▪Relativelysimpleestimationap-proach

▪Scalabletolargeproductportfolios

▪Lackofavailabledata

▪Morelabor-intensive

ConsequentialConsidersmarket-

mediatedeffects

Source:Tablebyauthors.

HowdocomparativeGHGimpactsandcorporateGHGinventoriesdiffer?

AcorporateGHGinventorycontainsdataonthehistoricalGHGemissionsfromsourceslocatedwithinacompany’sinternaloperationsandvaluechain.Developedusing

anattributionalapproach,corporateinventoriesare

structuredaroundthreescopesundertheGHGProtocolCorporateAccountingandReportingStandard(WRIandWBCSD2004):

▪Scope1emissionsareemissionsfromoperationsownedorcontrolledbythereportingcompany.

▪Scope2emissionsareemissionsfromthegenerationofelectricity,steam,heating,orcoolingthathasbeenconsumedbythereportingcompany.

▪Scope3emissionsareallindirectemissions(not

includedinscope2)thatoccurinthevaluechainofthereportingcompany,includingbothupstreamanddownstreamemissions.Scope3emissionsaredividedinto15differentcategories,suchaspurchasedgoodsandservices(category#1),theuseofsoldproducts

(category#11),andtheend-of-lifetreatmentofsoldproducts(category#12).

Holdingorganizationalboundariesandinventorymethodsconstant,changesininventorytotalsreflectincreases

ordecreasesintheabsoluteamountofemissionsto

theatmospherefromsourcesincludedintheinventoryboundary.Incontrast,comparativeimpactsneednot

translateintochangesinaggregateabsoluteemissionstotheatmosphere.

EstimatingandReportingtheComparativeEmissionsImpactsofProducts

Also,whenacompanyusestheattributionalapproach,itscorporateinventorywillonlyfullycapturecomparative

impactswhentheassessmentcomparesproductsfrom

thesamecompany.Forexample,anelectricmotormightbemoreefficientcomparedwithanolderversionofthatmodel.Thisimprovementinefficiencycouldbereflectedasareductioninscope3emissions(fromtheuseofsoldproducts),butithasalsoformedthebasisofclaimsof

positiveimpactsestimatedusingattributionalLCA.Suchoverlappingclaimsarenotuncommon—in35percentofatotalof81claimsinvolvingproductenergyefficiency,com-paniesusedpriormodelversionsasthereferenceproduct(seebelowfordescriptionofresearchmethodology).In

contrast,telecommunicationssoftwaremightgenerate

positiveimpactswhencomparedwithbusinesstravel,butthisimpactwouldneverbecapturedwithinthesoftwarevendor’sGHGinventory.

Companieshaveexpressedmuchconfusionastowhetheroverlappingclaimsareappropriate,reflectinguncertaintyaboutthefundamentalnatureofcomparativeimpacts

(specifically,positiveimpacts)andwhattypesofproductscanbesaidtogiverisetothem.Ingeneral,overlappingclaimsarenotconsideredaprobleminthispaperand

norecommendationsareprovidedonthistopic.Thisis

becausecorporateinventoriesandcomparativeassess-

mentsprovidedifferent,butcomplementary,perspectivesonacompany’semissionsreductionefforts.Aproductcancontributebothtoreductionsinacorporateinventoryandtobroaderreductionsinsociety.Nonetheless,compara-tiveimpactsshouldbedisclosedseparatelyfromGHG

inventorydatainpublicreportsbecausethetwohavebeencalculatedusingfundamentallydifferentandnoncompa-rableapproaches(seeAppendixA).

WhatclaimsdocompaniesmakeaboutcomparativeGHGimpacts?

Basedonareviewofreportingpractices(seebelowfordetails),nocompanypubliclyreportsnegativeimpactsforitsownproducts.Thisisperhapsnotsurprising.Incontrast,manycompaniesmakeclaimsaboutpositiveimpacts.Forinstance,70percentofthe1,793companiesthatrespondedtothe2014CarbonDisclosureProject

(CDP)climatechangesurveyindicatedthattheuseoftheirproductsbyathirdparty“avoided”emissions.Thisviewwasheldbythemajorityofcompaniesinmostsec-tors,particularlyinthetelecommunicationservicesandutilitiessectors(Figure2).

0

Figure2|PercentageofCompaniesinDifferentSectorsThatBelieveTheirProductsHavePositiveGHGImpacts

HealthCare

ConsumerStaples

Financials

ConsumerDiscretionary

Materials

InformationTechnology

Energy

Industrials

Utilities

TelecommunicationServices

02040608010

Source:2014CDPClimateChangeQuestionnaire(totalof1,793companiessurveyed).

WORKINGPAPER|January2019|7

WORLDRESOURCESINSTITUTE

8|

Companiesclaimpositiveimpac