Are there flaws in freight emission reporting, and is the information credible and comparable? : A qualitative case study on Finnish-listed industrial- and retail companies
Elvenberg, Peik (2023)
2023
Julkaisu on tekijänoikeussäännösten alainen. Teosta voi lukea ja tulostaa henkilökohtaista käyttöä varten. Käyttö kaupallisiin tarkoituksiin on kielletty.
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2023050942557
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2023050942557
Tiivistelmä
The growing demand for greater transparency from stakeholders regarding corporate actions has led companies to disclose their non-financial data by demonstrating their actions in a non-financial report. This data is used at regulatory levels to meet current and future regulations to comply with United Nations SDG goals, but also to assist investors in making environmentally conscious investments.
This paper investigates the topic of ESG reporting, with a specific focus on Scope 3 emissions of shipping that affect Finnish companies. The study assesses the current reporting standards' relevance, reliability, and comparability. The reporting standard reviewed in this paper is the Greenhouse Gas Protocol standard, used by companies reporting their ESG performance using the SASB and GRI frameworks.
The research employed a qualitative methodology, specifically utilizing a case study approach. The study has gathered empirics from ten non-financial reports and five interviews with employees working with the company's ESG information.
The analysis of the empirical data indicates that the current reporting standards present uncertainties for reporting companies in reporting their freight emissions. Current standards allow companies to report their emissions using one of three calculation models and selecting between primary and secondary data, which makes companies' freight emissions difficult to compare against other companies.
The reporting of freight emissions has highlighted the existence of certain bottlenecks. Specifically, the data collection process was not seamless, and the quality of the collected data was inconsistent. Consequently, those involved in data collection found it to be a time-consuming task and sought to improve the quality of the data. Furthermore, the collected data was of little relevance to the company's decision-making and hence had limited utility.
Ultimately, the reliability of freight emission reporting varies depending on the calculation method utilized by the reporting company and the quality of the data acquired by the shipping company, as evidenced by the GHG Protocol requirements and the interviewees' responses. Nevertheless, as reporting companies rarely disclose their chosen calculation method, external stakeholders may face difficulties in assessing the credibility of a particular company's emission report.
This paper investigates the topic of ESG reporting, with a specific focus on Scope 3 emissions of shipping that affect Finnish companies. The study assesses the current reporting standards' relevance, reliability, and comparability. The reporting standard reviewed in this paper is the Greenhouse Gas Protocol standard, used by companies reporting their ESG performance using the SASB and GRI frameworks.
The research employed a qualitative methodology, specifically utilizing a case study approach. The study has gathered empirics from ten non-financial reports and five interviews with employees working with the company's ESG information.
The analysis of the empirical data indicates that the current reporting standards present uncertainties for reporting companies in reporting their freight emissions. Current standards allow companies to report their emissions using one of three calculation models and selecting between primary and secondary data, which makes companies' freight emissions difficult to compare against other companies.
The reporting of freight emissions has highlighted the existence of certain bottlenecks. Specifically, the data collection process was not seamless, and the quality of the collected data was inconsistent. Consequently, those involved in data collection found it to be a time-consuming task and sought to improve the quality of the data. Furthermore, the collected data was of little relevance to the company's decision-making and hence had limited utility.
Ultimately, the reliability of freight emission reporting varies depending on the calculation method utilized by the reporting company and the quality of the data acquired by the shipping company, as evidenced by the GHG Protocol requirements and the interviewees' responses. Nevertheless, as reporting companies rarely disclose their chosen calculation method, external stakeholders may face difficulties in assessing the credibility of a particular company's emission report.
Kokoelmat
- 512 Liiketaloustiede [372]