IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/bstrat/v21y2012i6p412-422.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Corporate Carbon Strategies and Greenhouse Gas Emission Assessments: The Implications of Scope 3 Emission Factor Selection

Author

Listed:
  • John Downie
  • Wendy Stubbs

Abstract

Scholars and practitioners acknowledge the benefits of organizations understanding their contribution to global warming and implementing carbon management strategies to address climate change concerns. A key element of a carbon management strategy is to reduce emissions, which requires an assessment of a firm's greenhouse gas emissions. For most organizations the indirect (scope 3) emissions represent the largest portion of their total carbon footprint. When facility‐specific data are not available, firms are encouraged to use standard emission factors to calculate scope 3 emissions. This paper investigates how sampled Australian organizations assess their scope 3 emissions with respect to the emission factors they are using to convert activity data into units of carbon dioxide equivalent emission (CO2‐e), and the implications for producing an accurate emission assessment. The research study found that, where conversion information was not available in a recognized government publication, the use of varying conversion value sources resulted in wide discrepancies in reported emissions for like activities. This undermines the assessment quality, makes comparison of results across organizations difficult and can lead to inappropriate carbon management strategy choices and misallocation of resources. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Suggested Citation

  • John Downie & Wendy Stubbs, 2012. "Corporate Carbon Strategies and Greenhouse Gas Emission Assessments: The Implications of Scope 3 Emission Factor Selection," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(6), pages 412-422, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:bstrat:v:21:y:2012:i:6:p:412-422
    DOI: 10.1002/bse.1734
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1734
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/bse.1734?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Munksgaard, Jesper & Pedersen, Klaus Alsted, 2001. "CO2 accounts for open economies: producer or consumer responsibility?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 327-334, March.
    2. Su‐Yol Lee, 2012. "Corporate Carbon Strategies in Responding to Climate Change," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(1), pages 33-48, January.
    3. Peters, Glen P., 2008. "From production-based to consumption-based national emission inventories," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 13-23, March.
    4. Ans Kolk & David Levy & Jonatan Pinkse, 2008. "Corporate Responses in an Emerging Climate Regime: The Institutionalization and Commensuration of Carbon Disclosure," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 719-745.
    5. Lenzen, Manfred, 2008. "Consumer and producer environmental responsibility: A reply," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 547-550, June.
    6. Andrew, Robbie & Forgie, Vicky, 2008. "A three-perspective view of greenhouse gas emission responsibilities in New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 194-204, December.
    7. David Christopher Sprengel & Timo Busch, 2011. "Stakeholder engagement and environmental strategy – the case of climate change," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(6), pages 351-364, September.
    8. Blanca Gallego & Manfred Lenzen, 2005. "A consistent input-output formulation of shared producer and consumer responsibility," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 365-391.
    9. David Annandale & Angus Morrison‐Saunders & George Bouma, 2004. "The impact of voluntary environmental protection instruments on company environmental performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, January.
    10. Paul Jarvis, 2007. "Never mind the footprint, get the mass right," Nature, Nature, vol. 446(7131), pages 24-24, March.
    11. Lenzen, Manfred & Murray, Joy & Sack, Fabian & Wiedmann, Thomas, 2007. "Shared producer and consumer responsibility -- Theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 27-42, February.
    12. Chin Hee Hahn & Sang-Hyop Lee & Kyoung-Soo Yoon (ed.), 2012. "Responding to Climate Change," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14709.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Francisco Porles-Ochoa & Ruben Guevara, 2023. "Moderation of Clean Energy Innovation in the Relationship between the Carbon Footprint and Profits in CO₂e-Intensive Firms: A Quantitative Longitudinal Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-19, June.
    2. David Coen & Kyle Herman & Tom Pegram, 2022. "Are corporate climate efforts genuine? An empirical analysis of the climate ‘talk–walk’ hypothesis," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(7), pages 3040-3059, November.
    3. Ayman Hassan Bazhair & Saleh F. A. Khatib & Hamzeh Al Amosh, 2022. "Taking Stock of Carbon Disclosure Research While Looking to the Future: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-24, October.
    4. Zafrilla, Jorge-Enrique & Arce, Guadalupe & Cadarso, María-Ángeles & Córcoles, Carmen & Gómez, Nuria & López, Luis-Antonio & Monsalve, Fabio & Tobarra, María-Ángeles, 2019. "Triple bottom line analysis of the Spanish solar photovoltaic sector: A footprint assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Jian Zhang & Jingyang Liu & Li Dong & Qi Qiao, 2022. "CO 2 Emissions Inventory and Its Uncertainty Analysis of China’s Industrial Parks: A Case Study of the Maanshan Economic and Technological Development Area," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-14, September.
    6. Reza Farrahi Moghaddam & Fereydoun Farrahi Moghaddam & Mohamed Cheriet, 2014. "A Multi-Entity Input Output (MEIO) Approach to Sustainability - Water-Energy-GHG (WEG) Footprint Statements in Use Cases from Auto and Telco Industries," Papers 1404.6227, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2014.
    7. Nitika Sharma & Raiswa Saha & V. Raja Sreedharan & Justin Paul, 2020. "Relating the role of green self‐concepts and identity on green purchasing behaviour: An empirical analysis," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3203-3219, December.
    8. Gianni Guastella & Stefano Pareglio & Caterina Schiavoni, 2023. "An Empirical Approach to Integrating Climate Reputational Risk in Long-Term Scenario Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-17, March.
    9. Ozgur Isil & Rose Sebastianelli, 2020. "Arcs of carbon awareness in the value chain and their antecedents," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 503-518, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhang, Youguo, 2015. "Provincial responsibility for carbon emissions in China under different principles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 142-153.
    2. Lenzen, Manfred & Murray, Joy, 2010. "Conceptualising environmental responsibility," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 261-270, December.
    3. Rui Xie & Chao Gao & Guomei Zhao & Yu Liu & Shengcheng Xu, 2017. "Empirical Study of China’s Provincial Carbon Responsibility Sharing: Provincial Value Chain Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16, April.
    4. Xu, Xueliu & Wang, Qian & Ran, Chenyang & Mu, Mingjie, 2021. "Is burden responsibility more effective? A value-added method for tracing worldwide carbon emissions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    5. Boya Zhang & Shukuan Bai & Yadong Ning & Tao Ding & Yan Zhang, 2020. "Emission Embodied in International Trade and Its Responsibility from the Perspective of Global Value Chain: Progress, Trends, and Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-26, April.
    6. Franco Solís, Alberto & F.T. Avelino, André & Carrascal-Incera, André, 2020. "The evolution of household-induced value chains and their environmental implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    7. Court, Christa D., 2012. "Enhancing U.S. hazardous waste accounting through economic modeling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 79-89.
    8. Zhu, Yongbin & Shi, Yajuan & Wu, Jing & Wu, Leying & Xiong, Wen, 2018. "Exploring the Characteristics of CO2 Emissions Embodied in International Trade and the Fair Share of Responsibility," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 574-587.
    9. Maria Csutora & Zs�fia Vetőn� m�zner, 2014. "Proposing a beneficiary-based shared responsibility approach for calculating national carbon accounts during the post-Kyoto era," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 599-616, September.
    10. Marques, Alexandra & Rodrigues, João & Lenzen, Manfred & Domingos, Tiago, 2012. "Income-based environmental responsibility," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 57-65.
    11. Zhang, Youguo, 2013. "The responsibility for carbon emissions and carbon efficiency at the sectoral level: Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 967-975.
    12. Wiedmann, Thomas, 2009. "A review of recent multi-region input-output models used for consumption-based emission and resource accounting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 211-222, December.
    13. Marques, Alexandra & Rodrigues, João & Domingos, Tiago, 2013. "International trade and the geographical separation between income and enabled carbon emissions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 162-169.
    14. Theodore Metaxas & Maria Tsavdaridou, 2017. "Environmental Policy and CSR in Petroleum Refining Companies in Greece: Content and Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Analysis," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(03), pages 1-29, September.
    15. Karen Turner & Max Munday & Stuart McIntyre & Christa D Jensen, 2011. "Incorporating Jurisdiction Issues into Regional Carbon Accounts under Production and Consumption Accounting Principles," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(3), pages 722-741, March.
    16. Anke Schaffartzik & Dominik Wiedenhofer & Nina Eisenmenger, 2015. "Raw Material Equivalents: The Challenges of Accounting for Sustainability in a Globalized World," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-26, April.
    17. Rosa van den Ende & Antoine Mandel & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2023. "Network-based allocation of responsibility for GHG emissions," Post-Print halshs-04188365, HAL.
    18. Dong, Huijuan & Geng, Yong & Fujita, Tsuyoshi & Jacques, David A., 2014. "Three accounts for regional carbon emissions from both fossil energy consumption and industrial process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 276-283.
    19. Airebule, Palizha & Cheng, Haitao & Ishikawa, Jota, 2023. "Assessing carbon emissions embodied in international trade based on shared responsibility," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    20. Thomas Grebel, 2019. "What a difference carbon leakage correction makes!," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 939-971, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:bstrat:v:21:y:2012:i:6:p:412-422. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0836 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.