CDP Turkey-100 Report 2011
On behalf of 551 investors with assets of US$71 trillion
CDP Partner Sponsor Report Sponsor 2011 Carbon Disclosure Project Investor Members
CDP works with investors globally to advance the investment opportunities and reduce the risks posed by climate change by asking almost 6,000 of the world’s largest companies to report on their climate strategies, GHG emissions and energy use in the standardized Investor CDP format. To learn more about CDP’s member offering and becoming a member, please contact us or visit the CDP Investor Member section at www.cdproject.net/investormembers
ABRAPP - Associação Catholic Super PFA Pension Brasileira das Entidades CCLA Investment Raiffeisen Schweiz Fechadas de Previdência Management Ltd Royal Bank of Scotland Complementar Ethos Foundation Group AEGON N.V. Generation Investment Robeco AKBANK T.A.S. Management Rockefeller & Co., Inc. Allianz Global Investors HSBC Holdings plc SAM Group Kapitalanlagegesellschaft ING mbH Schroders KB Kookmin Bank ATP Group Scottish Widows KLP Investment Partnership Aviva Investors Legg Mason, Inc. SEB Bank of America Merrill Lynch London Pensions Fund Sompo Japan Authority Insurance Inc. BlackRock Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Standard Chartered BP Investment Group (MUFG) Management Limited Sun Life Financial Inc. Morgan Stanley California Public TD Asset Management Employees’ Retirement National Australia Bank Inc. and TDAM USA Inc. System NEI Investments The Wellcome Trust California State Neuberger Berman Zurich Cantonal Bank Teachers’ Retirement Newton Investment System Management Limited Calvert Asset Nordea Investment Management Company, Management Inc.
2 CDP Signatories 2011 Carbon Disclosure Project Investor Signatories
Baumann and Partners S.A. de Pury Pictet Turrettini & Cie S.A. Carbon Disclosure Project 2011 BAWAG P.S.K. INVEST GmbH DekaBank Deutsche Girozentrale Bayern LB Deutsche Asset Management Investmentgesellschaft mbH 551 financial institutions with assets of BayernInvest Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH Deutsche Bank AG BBC Pension Trust Ltd Deutsche Postbank Vermögensmanagement S.A. US$71 trillion were signatories to the BBVA Development Bank of Japan Inc. CDP 2011 information request dated Bedfordshire Pension Fund Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) Bentall Kennedy Dexia Asset Management February 1st, 2011 Beutel Goodman and Co. Ltd Dexus Property Group BioFinance Administração de Recursos de Terceiros Ltda DnB NOR ASA BlackRock Domini Social Investments LLC Aberdeen Asset Managers Blumenthal Foundation Dongbu Insurance Aberdeen Immobilien KAG mbH BNP Paribas Investment Partners DWS Investment GmbH ABRAPP - Associação Brasileira das Entidades Fechadas de BNY Mellon Earth Capital Partners LLP Previdência Complementar BNY Mellon Service Kapitalanlage Gesellschaft East Sussex Pension Fund Active Earth Investment Management Boston Common Asset Management, LLC Ecclesiastical Investment Management Acuity Investment Management BP Investment Management Limited Ecofi Investissements - Groupe Credit Cooperatif Addenda Capital Inc. Brasilprev Seguros e Previdência S/A. Edward W. Hazen Foundation Advanced Investment Partners British Columbia Investment Management Corporation (bcIMC) EEA Group Ltd Advantage Asset Managers (Pty) Ltd BT Investment Management Elan Capital Partners AEGON Magyarország Befektetési Alapkezelo´´ Zrt. Busan Bank Element Investment Managers AEGON N.V. CAAT Pension Plan ELETRA - Fundação Celg de Seguros e Previdência AEGON-INDUSTRIAL Fund Management Co., Ltd Cadiz Holdings Limited Environment Agency Active Pension fund AFP Integra Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec Epworth Investment Management AIG Asset Management Caisse des Dépôts Equilibrium Capital Group Ak Asset Management Caixa Beneficente dos Empregados da Companhia Siderurgica Erste Asset Management AKBANK T.A.S. Nacional - CBS Erste Group Bank Alberta Investment Management Corporation (AIMCo) Caixa de Previdência dos Funcionários do Banco do Nordeste do Essex Investment Management Company, LLC Brasil (CAPEF) Alberta Teachers Retirement Fund ESSSuper Caixa Econômica Federal Alcyone Finance Ethos Foundation Caixa Geral de Depositos Allianz Elementar Versicherungs-AG Eureko B.V. Caja de Ahorros de Valencia, Castellón y Valencia, BANCAJA Allianz Group Eurizon Capital SGR Caja Navarra Altira Group Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada Pension Plan for Clergy and Amalgamated Bank California Public Employees’ Retirement System Lay Workers AMP Capital Investors California State Teachers’ Retirement System Evli Bank Plc AmpegaGerling Investment GmbH California State Treasurer F&C Management Ltd Amundi AM Calvert Asset Management Company, Inc FAELCE – Fundacao Coelce de Seguridade Social ANBIMA – Associação Brasileira das Entidades dos Mercados Canada Pension Plan Investment Board FAPERS- Fundação Assistencial e Previdenciária da Extensão Rural Financeiro e de Capitais Canadian Friends Service Committee (Quakers) do Rio Grande do Sul Antera Gestão de Recursos S.A. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) FASERN - Fundação COSERN de Previdência Complementar APG Group CAPESESP Fédéris Gestion d’Actifs Aprionis Capital Innovations, LLC FIDURA Capital Consult GmbH Aquila Capital CARE Super Pty Ltd FIM Asset Management Ltd ARIA (Australian Reward Investment Alliance) Carlson Investment Management FIPECq - Fundação de Previdência Complementar dos Arisaig Partners Asia Pte Ltd Carmignac Gestion Empregados e Servidores da FINEP, do IPEA, do CNPq ARK Investment Advisors Inc. Catherine Donnelly Foundation FIRA. - Banco de Mexico Arma Portföy Yönetimi A.S. Catholic Super First Affirmative Financial Network, LLC ASB Community Trust Cbus Superannuation Fund First Swedish National Pension Fund (AP1) ASM Administradora de Recursos S.A. CCLA Investment Management Ltd Firstrand Limited ASN Bank Celeste Funds Management Limited Five Oceans Asset Management Pty Limited Assicurazioni Generali Spa Central Finance Board of the Methodist Church Florida State Board of Administration (SBA) ATP Group Ceres Folketrygdfondet Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited Christian Super Folksam Australian Central Credit Union incorporating Savings & Loans Christopher Reynolds Foundation Fondaction CSN Credit Union Church Commissioners for England Fondation de Luxembourg Australian Ethical Investment Limited Church of England Pensions Board Fondiaria-SAI AustralianSuper CI Mutual Funds’ Signature Global Advisors Fonds de Réserve pour les Retraites – FRR Aviva Clean Yield Group, Inc. Fourth Swedish National Pension Fund (AP4) Aviva Investors Cleantech Invest AG FRANKFURT-TRUST Investment-Gesellschaft mbH AXA Group ClearBridge Advisors Fukoku Capital Management Inc Baillie Gifford & Co. Climate Change Capital Group Ltd FUNCEF - Fundação dos Economiários Federais Bakers Investment Group (Australia) Pty Ltd CM-CIC Asset Management Fundação AMPLA de Seguridade Social - Brasiletros Banco Bradesco S/A Colonial First State Global Asset Management Fundação Atlântico de Seguridade Social Banco de Credito del Peru BCP Comerica Incorporated Fundação Attilio Francisco Xavier Fontana Banco de Galicia y Buenos Aires S.A. Comite syndical national de retraite Bâtirente Fundação Banrisul de Seguridade Social Banco do Brasil S/A Commerzbank AG Fundação de Assistência e Previdência Social do BNDES - FAPES Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social - BNDES CommInsure FUNDAÇÃO ELETROBRÁS DE SEGURIDADE SOCIAL - ELETROS Banco Santander Commonwealth Bank of Australia Fundação Forluminas de Seguridade Social - FORLUZ Banesprev – Fundo Banespa de Seguridade Social Compton Foundation, Inc. FUNDAÇÃO ITAUBANCO Banesto (Banco Español de Crédito S.A.) Concordia Versicherungsgruppe Fundação Itaúsa Industrial Bank of America Merrill Lynch Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds Fundação Promon de Previdência Social Bank of Montreal Co-operative Financial Services (CFS) Fundação Vale do Rio Doce de Seguridade Social - VALIA Bank Sarasin & Cie AG Corston-Smith Asset Management Sdn. Bhd. Fundação Rede Ferroviaria de Seguridade Social – Refer Bank Vontobel CRD Analytics Fundação Sistel de Seguridade Social (Sistel) Bankhaus Schelhammer & Schattera Kapitalanlagegesellschaft Crédit Agricole FUNDIÁGUA - FUNDAÇÃO DE PREVIDENCIA COMPLEMENTAR m.b.H. DA CAESB Credit Suisse BANKINTER S.A. Futuregrowth Asset Management Gruppo Credito Valtellinese BankInvest Gartmore Investment Management Ltd Daegu Bank Banque Degroof GEAP Fundação de Seguridade Social Daiwa Securities Group Inc. Barclays Generali Deutschland Holding AG
3 Generation Investment Management Landsorganisationen i Sverige Norfolk Pension Fund Genus Capital Management LBBW - Landesbank Baden-Württemberg Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM) Gjensidige Forsikring ASA LBBW Asset Management Investmentgesellschaft mbH North Carolina Retirement System GLS Gemeinschaftsbank eG LD Lønmodtagernes Dyrtidsfond Northern Ireland Local Government Officers’ Superannuation Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Legal & General Investment Management Committee (NILGOSC) GOOD GROWTH INSTITUT für globale Vermögensentwicklung Legg Mason, Inc. Northern Trust mbH LGT Capital Management Ltd. Nykredit Governance for Owners LIG Insurance Co., Ltd Oddo & Cie Government Employees Pension Fund (“GEPF”), Republic of South Light Green Advisors, LLC OECO Capital Lebensversicherung AG Africa Living Planet Fund Management Company S.A. Old Mutual plc Green Cay Asset Management Local Authority Pension Fund Forum OMERS Administration Corporation Green Century Capital Management Local Government Super Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Groupe Crédit Coopératif Local Super OP Fund Management Company Ltd Groupe Investissement Responsable Inc. Lombard Odier Darier Hentsch & Cie Oppenheim Fonds Trust GmbH GROUPE OFI AM London Pensions Fund Authority Opplysningsvesenets fond (The Norwegian Church Endowment) Grupo Banco Popular Lothian Pension Fund OPSEU Pension Trust Grupo Santander Brasil Lupus alpha Asset Management GmbH Oregon State Treasurer Gruppo Credito Valtellinese Macif Gestion Orion Asset Management LLC Gruppo Montepaschi Macquarie Group Limited Parnassus Investments Guardian Ethical Management Inc MAMA Sustainable Incubation AG Pax World Funds Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation Man Pensioenfonds Vervoer Guosen Securities Co., LTD. Maple-Brown Abbott Limited Pension Denmark Hang Seng Bank Marc J. Lane Investment Management, Inc. Pension Fund for Danish Lawyers and Economists Harbourmaster Capital Maryland State Treasurer Pension Protection Fund Harrington Investments, Inc Matrix Asset Management Pensionsmyndigheten Hauck & Aufhäuser Asset Management GmbH McLean Budden PETROS - The Fundação Petrobras de Seguridade Social Hazel Capital LLP MEAG MUNICH ERGO Asset Management GmbH PFA Pension HDFC Bank Ltd Meeschaert Gestion Privée PGGM Health Super Fund Meiji Yasuda Life Insurance Company Phillips, Hager & North Investment Management Ltd. Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP) Mendesprev Sociedade Previdenciária PhiTrust Active Investors Henderson Global Investors Merck Family Fund Phoenix Asset Management Inc. Hermes Fund Managers Meritas Mutual Funds Pictet Asset Management SA HESTA Super MetallRente GmbH PKA HSBC Global Asset Management (Deutschland) GmbH Metrus – Instituto de Seguridade Social Pluris Sustainable Investments SA HSBC Holdings plc Metzler Investment Gmbh PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. HSBC INKA Internationale Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH MFS Investment Management Pohjola Asset Management Ltd Hyundai Marine & Fire Insurance. Co., Ltd. Midas International Asset Management Portfolio 21 Investments Hyundai Securities Co., Ltd. Miller/Howard Investments Porto Seguro S.A. Ibgeana Society of Assistance and Security SIAS / Sociedade PREVHAB PREVIDÊNCIA COMPLEMENTAR Ibgeana de Assistência e Seguridade (SIAS) Mirae Asset Global Investments Co. Ltd. PREVI Caixa de Previdência dos Funcionários do Banco do Brasil IDBI Bank Ltd Mirae Asset Securities Co., Ltd. PREVIG Sociedade de Previdência Complementar Ilmarinen Mutual Pension Insurance Company Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate Provinzial Rheinland Holding Impax Group plc Mistra, Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research Prudential Investment Management IndusInd Bank Limited Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (MUFG) Psagot Investment House Ltd Industrial Bank (A) Mizuho Financial Group, Inc. PSP Investments Industrial Bank of Korea Mn Services PSS - Seguridade Social Industry Funds Management Monega Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH Q Capital Partners Co. Ltd Infrastructure Development Finance Company Morgan Stanley QBE Insurance Group ING Motor Trades Association of Australia Superannuation Fund Pty Ltd Rabobank Insight Investment Management (Global) Ltd Mutual Insurance Company Pension-Fennia Raiffeisen Schweiz Instituto de Seguridade Social dos Correios e Telégrafos- Postalis Natcan Investment Management Railpen Investments Instituto Infraero de Seguridade Social - INFRAPREV Nathan Cummings Foundation, The Rathbones / Rathbone Greenbank Investments Instituto Sebrae De Seguridade Social - SEBRAEPREV National Australia Bank Real Grandeza Fundação de Previdência e Assistência Social Insurance Australia Group National Bank of Canada Rei Super Investec Asset Management National Grid Electricity Group of the Electricity Supply Pension Scheme Reliance Capital Ltd Irish Life Investment Managers National Grid UK Pension Scheme Resolution Itau Asset Management National Pensions Reserve Fund of Ireland Resona Bank, Limited Itaú Unibanco Holding S A National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) Reynders McVeigh Capital Management Janus Capital Group Inc. NATIXIS RLAM Jarislowsky Fraser Limited Nedbank Limited Robeco JPMorgan Chase & Co. Needmor Fund Rockefeller Financial Jubitz Family Foundation NEI Investments Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment Jupiter Asset Management Nelson Capital Management, LLC Royal Bank of Canada Kaiser Ritter Partner (Schweiz) AG Nest Sammelstiftung Royal Bank of Scotland Group KB asset Management Neuberger Berman RREEF Investment GmbH KB Kookmin Bank New Amsterdam Partners LLC SAM Group KBC Asset Management NV New Mexico State Treasurer SAMPENSION KP LIVSFORSIKRING A/S KDB Asset Management Co., Ltd. New York City Employees Retirement System SAMSUNG FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE KEPLER-FONDS Kapitalanlagegesellschaft m. b. H. New York City Teachers Retirement System Samsung Securities KfW Bankengruppe New York State Common Retirement Fund (NYSCRF) Sanlam KlimaINVEST New Zealand Earthquake Commission Santa Fé Portfolios Ltda KLP Newton Investment Management Limited SAS Trustee Corporation Korea Investment Management Co., Ltd. NGS Super Sauren Finanzdienstleistungen GmbH & Co. KG The Korea Teachers Pension (KTP) NH-CA Asset Management Schroders Korea Technology Finance Corporation (KOTEC) Nikko Asset Management Co., Ltd. Scotiabank KPA Pension Nikko Cordial Securities Scottish Widows Investment Partnership La Banque Postale Asset Management Nissay Asset Management Corporation SEB La Financiere Responsable NORD/LB Kapitalanlagegesellschaft AG SEB Asset Management AG Lampe Asset Management GmbH Nordea Investment Management Second Swedish National Pension Fund (AP2)
4 SEIU Master Trust Toronto Atmospheric Fund Seligson & Co Fund Management Plc Trillium Asset Management Corporation Figure 1: 2011 Signatory Investor Sentinel Investments Triodos Investment Management SERPROS - Fundo Multipatrocinado Tryg Breakdown Seventh Swedish National Pension Fund (AP7) UBS Shinhan Bank UniCredit Group Shinhan BNP Paribas Investment Trust Management Co., Ltd Union Asset Management Holding AG 5% Shinkin Asset Management Co., Ltd Unipension 23% Siemens Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH UNISON staff pension scheme 1% Signet Capital Management Ltd UniSuper 37% SMBC Friend Securities Co., LTD Unitarian Universalist Association Smith Pierce, LLC United Methodist Church General Board of Pension and Health SNS Asset Management Benefits Social(k) United Nations Foundation Sociedade de Previdencia Complementar da Dataprev - Prevdata Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS) Solaris Investment Management Limited Vancity Group of Companies Sompo Japan Insurance Inc. VCH Vermögensverwaltung AG Sopher Investment Management Veris Wealth Partners SPF Beheer bv Veritas Investment Trust GmbH Sprucegrove Investment Management Ltd Vermont State Treasurer Standard Chartered Vexiom Capital, L.P. Standard Chartered Korea Limited VicSuper Pty Ltd Standard Life Investments Victorian Funds Management Corporation State Bank of India VietNam Holding Ltd. 34% State Street Corporation Vision Super StatewideSuper VOLKSBANK INVESTMENTS Waikato Community Trust Inc StoreBrand ASA Asset Managers Strathclyde Pension Fund Walden Asset Management, a division of Boston Trust & Investment Management Company Stratus Group Asset Owners WARBURG - HENDERSON Kapitalanlagegesellschaft für Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation Immobilien mbH Banks Sumitomo Mitsui Card Company, Limited WARBURG INVEST KAPITALANLAGEGESELLSCHAFT MBH Insurance Sumitomo Mitsui Finance & Leasing Co., Ltd Wells Fargo & Company Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group West Yorkshire Pension Fund Other The Sumitomo Trust & Banking Co., Ltd. WestLB Mellon Asset Management (WMAM) Sun Life Financial Inc. Westpac Banking Corporation Superfund Asset Management GmbH White Owl Capital AG SUSI Partners AG Winslow Management, A Brown Advisory Investment Group Sustainable Capital Woori Bank Svenska Kyrkan, Church of Sweden Woori Investment & Securities Co., Ltd. Swedbank AB YES BANK Limited Swiss Re York University Pension Fund Swisscanto Holding AG Youville Provident Fund Inc. Syntrus Achmea Asset Management Zegora Investment Management T. Rowe Price Zevin Asset Management T. SINAI KALKINMA BANKASI A.S. Zurich Cantonal Bank T.GARANTI BANKASI A.S. Tata Capital Limited TD Asset Management Inc. and TDAM USA Inc. Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association – College Retirement Equities Fund (TIAA-CREF) Telluride Association Tempis Asset Management Co. Ltd Figure 2: CDP Investor Signatories & Assets over time Terra Forvaltning AS TerraVerde Capital Management LLC The Brainerd Foundation 600 80 The Bullitt Foundation The Central Church Fund of Finland 70 The Collins Foundation 500 The Co-operative Asset Management The Co-operators Group Ltd 60 The Daly Foundation 400 The GPT Group 50 The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. The Japan Research Institute, Limited 300 40 The Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust The Local Government Pensions Institution The Pension Plan For Employees of the Public Service Alliance of 30 200
Canada Assets (US$ trillions) Number of Signatorie s The Pinch Group 20 The Presbyterian Church in Canada The Russell Family Foundation 100 10 The Shiga Bank, Ltd. The Standard Bank Group The United Church of Canada - General Council 0 0 The University of Edinburgh Endowment Fund 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 The Wellcome Trust Third Swedish National Pension Fund (AP3) Signatories Assets Threadneedle Asset Management Tokio Marine & Nichido Fire Insurance Co., Ltd.
5 CEO Foreword
CEO Foreword
Corporations, investors and governments today are faced with a choice: to compete aggressively for finite resources, or to advance towards a low carbon economy that enables sustainable, profitable growth, whilst reducing reliance on increasingly scarce materials.
Last year, global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions reached a record high. The International Energy Agency’s estimates made for bleak reading but compounded the necessity to take bold and decisive action if we are to have any chance of limiting temperature increase to the 2°C level agreed by world leaders to protect against catastrophic climate change.
What’s more, rising energy demands are competing for a limited supply of fossil fuels. The competition for increasingly scarce natural resources is putting pressure on commodity prices and having a growing impact both socially and economically. It is clear that today, more than ever, we must build momentum to decouple economic growth from emissions.
Managing carbon emissions and protecting the business from climate change impacts is fundamental to achieving sustainable and strong shareholder returns. Earlier this year, the investment consultancy Mercer released a report concluding that the best way for institutional investors to manage portfolio risk associated with climate change may be to shift 40% of their portfolios into climate-sensitive assets with an emphasis on those that can adapt to a low carbon environment.
An important part of an investor’s strategy should be to engage with the companies in which they invest to encourage performance improvement. Carbon Action is a new initiative launched by CDP this year. It is driven by a leading group of investors to encourage their portfolio companies to reduce emissions by investing in emissions reduction activities with a satisfactory payback period. Carbon Action reflects a growing recognition that there is a huge range of carbon reduction activities that companies can undertake that have a very clear business case. It is therefore in the interests of all investors, and not just the more active owners of investments, to ensure these actions are taken.
As the management of carbon continues to move into companies’ core business strategies and mainstream investment thinking, demand for primary corporate climate change information grows around the world. As well as working on behalf of 551 institutional investors to gather relevant information from large corporations around the world, CDP is also working with global businesses and governments to strengthen the resilience and sustainability of their supply chains through the CDP Supply Chain program. CDP Cities has launched to help the world’s major cities reduce climate change risk and bolster economic growth, whilst CDP Water Disclosure is now in its second year of working with major global companies to improve water management. A key part of CDP’s strategy is to ensure the effective use of data collected. To assist with this companies are able to obtain tools that help them to measure, report and manage carbon more effectively, through CDP Reporter Services.
It is through partnerships that CDP can achieve the largest impact. In Turkey we are delighted to be working with our local report writing partner Ernst & Young Turkey. In addition, we highly value the continued support of our Global Advisor, PwC, as well as that of Accenture, Microsoft, SAP and Bloomberg. These and our other partners around the world are integral to the acceleration of CDP’s mission.
Whilst we wait patiently for much needed global regulation, business must continue to forge ahead, innovate and seek out opportunities by doing more with less. The decisions that perpetuate a legitimate, low carbon and high growth economy will bring considerable value to those that have the foresight to make them. The information contained in this report and the companies’ responses assist in illuminating that path.
Paul Simpson CEO Carbon Disclosure Project
6 Sponsor Foreword - Akbank
Energy, a primary resource for maintaining economic developments of countries around the globe, has climbed to increased prominence in the global agenda today. Many institutions with global operations and visibility are continuing to work to produce safe, sustainable, environment-friendly energy policies with minimized risk. Analysis of energy production and consumption indicates that we are on the brink of a new economic order which will create a strong need for multi-dimensional and long-term strategies that put energy at the top of the agenda.
We are indeed entering a new era and the search for a global solution for economic growth, maintaining safe and plentiful energy supplies and fighting climate change is paramount. Our country must strike a careful and considered balance between ‘creating high-growth’ and ‘transitioning to a low carbon economy’. In other words, while on one hand we will have to develop optimum solutions in order to meet increasing energy demands, on the other hand, we must work to make the energy composition less ‘carbon-intensive’.
In a mid to long term period in which we will maintain economic growth by reducing carbon emissions, it is crucial that all stakeholders work for the same purpose in accordance with their respective responsibilities and capacities. The public and the private sector must work together to achieve this common goal as it is simply not possible for any single government to fight against global climate change alone. In this regard, the projects supported by governments must also be supported by private sector investments in both developed and developing countries.
It is clear from the research that most of the total cost of the measures to be taken to comply with climate change reduction quotas and reduce emissions must be covered by private sector and raising awareness of this matter is a prerequisite for its involvement. Part of the measures to reduce carbon emissions is to redirect private sector investments to innovative low emission technology and implementations, while at the same time giving priority to the R&D resources that support low-carbon development.
We, at Akbank, believe that the issue of climate change is a vital one which concerns the wider society and business community and we feel a strong responsibility to pioneer and support measures to reduce the impact of climate change. We see as part of our scope of responsibility, to stay abreast of the latest projects and measures to reduce the effects of climate change. We are therefore proud to have initiated the Carbon Disclosure Project in Turkey, which has created some of the greatest awareness campaigns on the subject and and pioneers improvement projects worldwide.
Carbon Disclosure Project, launched in 2000, is acting on behalf of 551 institutional investors holding US$ 71 trillion in assets under management. 3000 agencies and institutions in approximately 60 countries have been disclosing their greenhouse gas emissions and climate change strategies through the Project.
It gives me great pleasure that Turkey has been taking part in such a big and important initiative for the past two years. This year 20 companies have responded to the Carbon Disclosure Project in our country while this number was 11 in 2010. There are also 5 signatory investors in 2011 from Turkey. These developments show that our efforts in this matter have yielded results and give great hope to us.
I want to reiterate that we, at Akbank, will continue to work for a sustainable environment and fight against global climate change with our best efforts and sense of responsibility, and I would like to thank those who worked for and contributed to this valuable project. We hope that such meaningful work continues apace and that we are able to eliminate all adverse outcomes of the Climate Change by working together on a matter that is truly of global and immediate concern to us all.
Suzan Sabancı Dinçer The Chairman and Executive Board Member Akbank
7 Executive Summary
Introduction While Sabanci University is responsible was updated accordingly. The CDP for implementing the Investor CDP 2011 Information Request covers three The Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), programme, Turkey is also covered by major areas: (i) corporate management launched in 2000 in London, aims CDP’s other programmes. In 2010, 5 with regard to climate change, (ii) to accelerate solutions to climate Turkish supplier companies received management’s views on the risks and change and water management by information requests as part of the CDP opportunities that climate change putting relevant information at the heart Supply Chain programme. Istanbul presents to the business, (iii) greenhouse of business, policy and investment received CDP Cities questionnaire in gas emissions accounting. The decisions. CDP furthers this mission 2011. These numbers are expected to questions are grouped in five modules: by harnessing the collective power of grow in the following years. corporations, investors and political • Governance CDP acts on behalf of 551 institutional leaders to accelerate unified action on • Strategy climate change. investors, holding US$71 trillion in assets. CDP Turkey respondents • Targets & Initiatives Over 3,000 organizations in some have the unique opportunity to 60 countries around the world now communicate their climate change • Risks & Opportunities measure and disclose their greenhouse policies to international institutional • Emissions Data gas emissions, water management and investors through a proper platform. climate change strategies through CDP, Such an opportunity will enable This report presents the highlights of in order that they can set reduction responding companies to be more company responses, and sheds light targets and make performance visible to international investors on challenges affecting the disclosure of improvements. and increase investments in Turkey. corporate actions on climate change in Turkey. CDP operates the only global climate Investors in Turkey show an increasing change reporting system. Climate interest in climate change, in parallel Turkey’s Specific Challenges change is not a problem that exists to international trends. Currently within national boundaries. That is why there are 5 signatory investors to the Most challenges presented in CDP CDP harmonizes climate change data CDP Investor programme: Ak Asset Turkey Report 2010 continue to from organizations around the world and Management, Akbank T.A.Ş, Arma be significant obstacles for Turkish develop international carbon reporting Asset Management, T. Garanti Bank, companies to develop strong climate standards. and Industrial Development Bank of strategies. The uncertainty of Turkey’s Turkey (TSKB). Two of them, Ak Asset position with respect to international Since CDP sent out the first request Management and TSKB, are signatories agreements, and insufficient regulation for climate change information in 2003, to the CDP Water programme as well. are persistent. not only has the number of disclosing companies grown more than tenfold, CDP Questionnaire went through On the other hand, Turkish government but also the data is made available to a extensive consultation in 2010, and announced the first National Action growing body of audience.
CDP Turkey Table 1: Summary of CDP 2011 Responses of ISE-100 Companies Sabanci University is the local partner of CDP in Turkey with the sponsorship Response rate 17% of Akbank and report sponsorship of Ernst & Young Turkey. The project was launched in January 2010. As promised, Board level responsibility 60% CDP Turkey doubled its work for 2011 and expanded the invitation to include Scope 1 & 2 80% companies that are included in the emissions reporting Istanbul Stock Exchange 100 (ISE- Climate strategy integrated 100) index. The companies in the index into overall business 73% represent the largest 100 companies strategy by market capitalisation in Turkey, by Emissions reduction targets 33% the end of third quarter of 2010 fiscal year. The range of programmes carried Identified risks & 87% out within the CDP framework includes opportunities 30% Supply Chain, Cities, Water Disclosure, Public Procurement, and Investor CDP. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
8 Plan on Climate Change in August has an 8% response rate in its 3rd 2011. Further analyses are presented year, China has 11% in its 4th year, in the ‘Key Trends in Turkey’ section India has 28% in its 5th year, Asia within this report. It is also important (excluding Japan, India, China, and to note the significant share of Korea) has 26% in its 6th year, and securities investments trusts, real Brazil has 67% in its 7th year. Appendix 17% estate investment trusts, venture capital II presents detailed comparisons across trusts etc. within ISE-100. Such high all geographies covered in 2011. A total of 17 ISE-100 share does have a significant negative Furthermore, unlike Turkey, most of Companies responded impact on CDP response rates, as the developing countries within CDP to CDP 2011. There are these companies find it hard to disclose have national emissions targets, and emissions. emissions measurement standards. A three vountary response rapid increase in the response rates outside ISE-100. Unique Mission for CDP is expected in Turkey once rigorous Turkey national policies are implemented. In addition to being a data and ISE-100 companies see climate information broker, CDP Turkey has a change regulation as an opportunity. unique mission to facilitate a dialogue 77% of the respondents see regulation are from energy, telecommunication among companies, help emerging as a way to increase demand and services, consumer discretionary, consulting firms to become more visible, to benefit from their achievements in consumer staples, and utilities sectors. assist the government’s communication energy efficiency. 80% of respondents The interest from emission intensive efforts, educate and inform companies report that they perceive regulation as sectors is very encouraging. CDP Turkey about the likely benefits of responding risk to their business. aims to promote this trend, with the to the CDP’s invitation and share good support of the British Embassy project 60% of the respondents assign practices. through expanding CDP to emission responsibility for climate change intensive sectors. In this line, CDP Turkey is partnering to their board or other executive with the British Embassy in order to level. This proves that companies take CDP Scoring Methodology implement a project, titled “Expanding the issue seriously. This percentage CDP to Energy Intensive and Less is a decrease from 2010 responses, The CDP Scoring Methodology has Transparent Sectors in Turkey”. The and points to the need for nation-wide been developed by Price Waterhouse project aims to facilitate the dialogue policies for the private sector to maintain Coopers and CDP for assessing the around climate change within key its interest and support in the field. disclosure and performance levels of sectors, and help them build capacity to respondents. In 2011, this methodology 33% of the respondents have develop climate strategies, measure and was applied for the first time in Turkey. emissions reduction targets in disclose their emissions through CDP. place. Such low target levels are Ernst & Young Turkey assessed each Key Findings alarming, as private sector targets will response from ISE-100 companies be key in national reductions achieved. to score companies on disclosure A total of 17 ISE-100 companies Nation-wide government action will be using this methodology. However, responded to CDP 2011, giving crucial for companies to start setting more respondents from each sector a response rate of 17%. This total targets to reduce their emissions. are needed for healthy rankings and includes two ISE-100 companies comparisons. Therefore, this report will whose international parent companies 33% and 27% of respondents only acknowledge the companies below, responded on their behalf. For this reported third party verification which have disclosure scores higher reason, data relating to these two for their Scope 1 and Scope 2 than 70, in alphabetical order: Akbank companies was not included in the emissions respectively. CDP has T.A.Ş. Coca-Cola Içecek A.Ş. T. Garanti analyses within this report. There are a strong stand to support third party Bankası A.Ş. Türk Telekomünikasyon three voluntary responses outside the verification at a global level, as investors A.Ş. Zorlu Enerji Elektrik Üretim A.Ş. ISE-100 sample, taking the number are increasingly interested in moving of direct CDP responses from Turkish towards action based on reliable data. An overview of the methodology applied companies up to 20. While the In 2010, Turkish banks showed for assessing disclosure in 2011 is percentage response rate seems to a significant performance in their provided in this report. Scoring on have decreased from last year, the disclosure to CDP. Such high rates were performance was not implemented in actual number of respondent companies expected to encourage other sectors, as 2011. However, it is intended that in almost doubled compared to 2012, banks have a strong influence on others future years, performance scores will when only 10 responses were received. as they manage allocation of financial be incorporated and published together with disclosure scores, as the number Response rates to CDP 2011 across resources. In 2011, the respondent banks again carried out their strong of respondents and the quality of developing countries: When we look submissions increase. at CDP 2011 response rates, Russia presence, while they proved to be key drivers. The new respondents in 2011
9 2011 Carbon Disclosure Project Key Trends in Turkey 12 Members 02 Contents 2011 Carbon Disclosure Leadership 21 2011 Carbon Disclosure Project Signatories 03 Company Responses Overview & Key Findings - Turkey 2011 22 CEO Foreword: Paul Simpson, Carbon Disclosure Project 06 The way forward 31
Sponsor Foreword: Suzan Sabancı Appendix I: Summary Table - Dinçer, Akbank 07 Company Response Status 56
Executive Summary 08 Appendix II: Global Key Trends Summary 39 After the beginning, the second year in Turkey 11
10 After the beginning; the second year in Turkey
CDP Turkey was launched on the 11 likely benefits of responding to CDP’s students offered their voluntary January 2010 with a keynote speech invitation, sharing good practices and support to the project as well. We owe delivered by Prof. Nicholas Stern fostering mutual learning. the Sabanci University community for stressing the vulnerabilities of Turkey their on-going support. to climate change. Climate change • CDP-Turkey was invited to lead was then a new topic for Turkey and a workshop on the role of financial Meanwhile, other CDP programmes hence the first year was challenging. institutions in combatting climate also started to include companies change and how CDP can help by in Turkey. Five companies received We explained the difficulties we faced, the Banking Association of Turkey. requests directly by their buyers to including regulatory uncertainties, The workshop took place on the join CDP within the scope of CDP lack of emission calculation standards 18th February with more than 20 Supply Chain Project and four of them and lack of awareness in our 2010 participants from major banks responded. The CDP Water Disclosure report. In addition to these difficulties programme launched in 2010 had which are perhaps common to many • We organized our first workshop on two investor signatories from Turkey. developing countries, we noted that 31 March 2011 with 80 participants. Istanbul Municipality received an Turkey’s business group structures The workshop focused on reporting invitation to participate in CDP Cities posed a unique challenge for the process and the technicalities of amongst 42 cities around the world. project; the decision to disclose reporting through CDP. After the ‘beginning’, we have climate change response could not • We organized our second be made by the individual firms in become more ambitious. We plan to workshop on 16 June 2011. The overcome the negative ‘group affect’ some cases and required approval or workshop focused on financial endorsement at the holding level. on disclosure rates by engaging with opportunities and risk-adjusted returns sector organizations and developing None of these challenges have on low carbon businesses. voluntary disclosure initiatives. We are been overcome, and perhaps the • We updated our website and grateful to the British Government for persistence of the global financial issued three newsletters to share our supporting this ambitious undertaking crises and the crowding effect of the progress with the project. and allowing us to expand our team. intense political agenda in Turkey We are also grateful to our main can be added to the list. However, • We participated in Turkey’s sponsor Akbank and our report 19 months after the launch of the delegation to the Cancun conference. sponsor Ernst & Young Turkey for their project, we are overwhelmed by the continuous financial and intellectual speed of change within the private • We attended many workshops, support. sector in recognizing the risks and conferences and seminars organized opportunities posed by climate by other initiatives and shared our We will continue to expand our change, made apparent by the high knowledge, experience and thoughts activities with more confidence, more profile conferences, workshops, with the public. partners, more allies and more insight. corporate communications originated • We started scoring company by the private sector. For example, responses with the help of Ernst & two companies announced their Young Turkey office using the CDP Melsa Ararat participation in the CDP project by methodology. The scoring enabled us Director-CDP Turkey press conferences. We believe CDP to launch Turkey Carbon Disclosure Turkey activities have contributed to Leadership Award. this change amongst other factors. Business group structures, which We made hundreds of calls to originally affected the response rate the invitee companies; met with negatively, have played a positive their managers in charge, tried to role in broadening the circle of actors convince them to be a part of the involved in the discourse and action. project, answered their questions, helped the internal advocates to In 2011, we have increased the be heard by their top managers. number of invitees from 50 to 100. Many times, we have come across Therefore, 50 companies received Sabanci University alumni in positions invitation the first time to disclose their responsible for investor relations, climate change strategies. We have corporate communications, and continued the facilitation of dialog risk management. They were the between stakeholders, educating transformational managers in their and informing companies about the organisations. Sabanci University’s
11 Key Trends in Turkey
CDP Turkey 50 report in 2010, emission reduction projects’, prepared in 2012 remains unclear. The 16th which is the first CDP Turkey report, by the Ministry of Environment Conference of the Parties (COP) to the mainly focused on developments and Forestry, entered into force United Nations Framework Convention around climate change since the Rio in August 2010. The objective of on Climate Change (UNFCCC) took Summit and their effects on Turkey. the Communication is to facilitate place last year in Cancun Mexico, In 2011, this section aims to present Turkey’s participation to voluntary and was of crucial importance for a summary of developments around carbon markets, and ensure reliable shaping post-2012 climate strategies climate change within the past year. certification through regulating at a global scale. The most important principles and procedures around outcome from the conference, as In 2011, the Ministry of Environment project registry in Turkey. captured in Decision 1/CP.16, was and Forestry was abolished and the shared recognition of the need replaced by two newly formed offices: Table 2: Turkey’s Voluntary for action towards climate change the Ministry of Environment and Urban Carbon Market Profile mitigation and transition to a low Planning, and the Ministry of Forestry carbon economy, and the shared and Waterworks. These two bodies Registered projects vision for long-term corporation. are the primary agencies responsible for voluntary 151 for climate change, although other carbon markets Outside the UNFCCC negotiations, ministries are expected to play a Approximate another international development supporting role. annual emission - 10 Mt CO2e of crucial interest to Turkey is the reductions transition plans for the third phase Obstacles to Turkey’s transition of European Union Emission Trading towards a low-carbon economy Despite all shortfalls, international System. maintain their relevance. As a Party to resources from EU funds, the Global the Kyoto Protocol, but not included Environment Fund (GEF), and bilateral a) 16th Conference of the Parties in the Protocol’s Annex B, Turkey has agreements do exist, in addition to to the United Nations Framework no emission reduction commitments national resources, which can be used Convention on Climate Change (COP for the initial period ending at 2012. to facilitate Turkey’s transition to a 16) This absence of commitments creates low carbon economy. International uncertainty around Turkey’s future funds available for Turkey include: CDP Turkey was among the invited stance on climate issues. Furthermore, World Bank, European Bank for parties to COP 16, in December 2010, Turkey still lacks specific emission Reconstruction and Development, by the Turkish Ministry of Environment factors and standards for greenhouse French Development Agency (AFD), and Forestry. gas accounting. Greenhouse gas German Development Bank (KfW), UK inventories are largely carried out Trade and Investment Organisation, All parties agreed upon ‘measuring’, based on Intergovernmental Panel and Japan International Cooperation ‘reporting’, and ‘verification’ (MRV) on Climate Change (IPCC) default Agency (JICA). Turkey also receives aspects of GHG accounting, which emission factors, preventing the exact funding from the Clean Technology are crucial in financing and achieving calculation of absolute emissions in Fund, one of two Climate Investment emission reductions. The Cancun text Turkey. Funds. also obliges developing countries to report on their national emissions, The uncertain environment presented There have been significant climate actions, and the results above prevents Turkey from achievements in environmental in terms of emission avoidance. participating the flexible mechanisms regulation in Turkey during the past Furthermore, developing countries (i.e. emissions trading, Clean year. However, the steps taken for agreed to report their nationally Development Mechanism, and Joint their implementation will be of crucial appropriate mitigation actions Implementation) offered by the Kyoto importance. The difficulties that were and the support needed for their Protocol to assist Annex I countries faced up until now, in putting passed implementation to be recorded in a in meeting their GHG emission legislation into practice, should now registry, which will facilitate matching limitations. Currently Turkey can be overcome. of action with support from developed only participate in voluntary carbon economies. These developments are markets, and its participation to post- International Developments expected to have significant impact 2012 emission trading mechanisms is on emerging economies, including still unclear. Turkey. International action on climate Domestically, the ‘Communication on change beyond the end of the Kyoto The Cancun agreements also registry operations of greenhouse gas Protocol’s first commitment period established ‘Green Climate Fund’
12 to provide financial support to economies are setting ambitious factories to relocate abroad, leading to developing countries for adaptation reduction targets. threat of ‘carbon leakage’. To prevent and mitigation. Developed countries carbon leakage, the EU granted are committed to transfer $30 billion b) EU Emissions Trading Scheme - exemptions for industries deemed in the short term (2010-2012), and The next phase to be at risk. These industries will $100 billion a year by 2020 to support get 100% of their allowances free of climate adaptation in emerging The EU Emissions Trading System charge. Other medium-risk sectors will economies. However, there is still is one of the key policies introduced get 80% of allowances free of charge, much further work to be done in South by the EU to help meet its GHG and the percentage will be decreased Africa this year, to resolve issues emissions target under the Kyoto over time. around the sources of funds and their Protocol. As Europe-wide cap and allocation. trade scheme, it started in 2005, as the Environmental groups object to the first of its kind, and covers the highest high number of exempt industries Despite the progress made in Cancun, number of sectors within its kind. ‘The defined by the EU. They claim that there are many outstanding issues. Community Independent Transaction carbon leakage is inevitable for almost The difficult task of deciding the post- Log’ (CITL) was put into place to all sectors. This would mean that most 2012 future of the Kyoto Protocol gather information from national companies will be exempt from carbon - which sets binding targets for 37 registries to facilitate allowance emission requirements. industrialized countries including tracking and installation compliance the EU that currently end in 2012 - assessments each year. Participating Airlines will receive 85% of EU ETS remains unresolved. This has been countries are required to report to CITL allowances free in 2012. Allowances delayed until the December 2011 through their own national registries, above this limit will be bought COP 17 talks in Durban - South all gathered data are then put under through auctioning. The aim is to Africa. Nevertheless, the need for one umbrella database, the EU ETS eliminate 72 million tonnes of CO2 Kyoto Protocol signatories to reduce Registry. emissions by 2020. Free allocations in emissions by 25-45% by 2020 was aviation aims to facilitate adoption of emphasized again. Another area EU ETS was designed as a three- environmentally friendly practices and which remained undefined is the phase scheme. The first trading period technology by airline companies. sensitivity levels of countries to of the EU ETS, which was a ‘learning- climate change, and no international by-doing’ phase, started in 2005 and Turkey made a commitment to mechanisms to finance compensation ended in 2007. The second trading the EU to establish a GHG registry for climate damage were established. period, through 2007-2012, brought system at a sufficient level to facilitate While important steps were taken revised reporting and a tighter cap. emissions trading by 2019. Efforts are to preserve forests, expectations The last and the third phase will begin underway to harmonise systems with for REDD+ to reduce emissions by in 2012, and will last up until 2020. EU ETS guidelines, with the objective preventing deforestation were not fully of attaining EU-level standards in met. The third phase of the scheme was emission calculation systems. expanded and improved by Directive Where does Turkey sit within this 2009/29/EC. First of all, a 1.17% Government Response to picture? During the Cancun talks, annual target for emission capping Climate Change the Turkish delegation focused on from the EU states is set. Secondly, recognition of Turkey’s special status auctioning is set as the basic principle a) Existing projects on climate change by all parties, and enabling Turkey to for allocation of allowances, as it access to climate funds. As a result is the simplest and economically Turkey’s Second National of such efforts, Turkey was exempted efficient system, which will also ensure Communication from the requirement to set absolute environmentally efficient allocation. targets, and to contribute to generate Any allowances which will not be The First National Communication climate finance and technology. allocated free of charge should be (FNC) was prepared with the However, Turkey’s request to gain auctioned by Member States, from cooperation of UNDP and the Republic access to funds was rejected. 2013 onwards. At least 50% of the of Turkey, and was submitted to revenue generated should be used for United Nations Framework Convention Emerging nations such as Brazil, activities, detailed by the Directive, to on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2009; China, India, Mexico and South Africa facilitate mitigation and adaptation in which was covered extensively in CDP announced their national emissions developing countries. It is also planned 2010 report. The capacity building reduction targets and renewable 12% of the revenue to be distributed process, which was accelerated during energy strategies. Turkey has no among states with low Gross National the preparation FNC, had a significant commitments for reduction, but is Products (GNP). positive impact on other climate among countries with largest increase mitigation efforts undertaken by in emissions since 1990. Turkey will A crucial issue for the industrial sector Turkey and helped to enhance public face increasing pressure to reduce is the share of allowances which will awareness. emissions, in an environment where be allocated free of charge. Tighter both developed and emerging rules on emissions might drive
13 Turkey has now started the will develop proposals to detail their financing private sector investments preparation of its Second National plans. in mid-size sustainable energy Communication (SNC). The overall projects. EBRD will offer a total of objective of the project, executed by Turkey’s proposal to PMR is related €400 million in loans to Turkish banks Ministry of Environment and Forestry to national emission reduction (Garanti Bank, Deniz Bank, Akbank, and implemented by UNDP, is to strategies and action plans. Target Vakifbank) for on-lending to private assist Turkey in the implementation sectors include: energy, industrial, sector borrowers to undertake mid- of obligations under the UNFCCC in waste, transportation, agriculture, size renewable energy, waste-to- the post-2012 period. Turkey expects land use, land use change and energy and industrial energy efficiency to submit its SNC to the UNFCCC forestry (LULUCF). The proposal investments. The loans aim to reduce Secretariat by the end of 2011. includes Turkey’s plans for Nationally energy intensity and ensure the The project is funded by the Global Appropriate Mitigation Actions sustainable development of the energy Environment Fund (GEF). (NAMAs) as part of emission reduction sector. activities. United Nations Joint Programme - The project is expected to help Enhancing the Capacity of Turkey to Furthermore, it draws upon Turkey’s enhance local environmental Adapt to Climate Change search for new carbon markets and consultancies working in the financial emphasizes the need for capacity and technical assessments for On December 2006, UNDP building for Turkey’s participation in renewable energy projects. Administrator Kemal Derviş and international carbon markets. The Spanish Secretary of State for activities to facilitate capacity building Private Sector Renewable Energy International Cooperation, Leire include: establishment of measuring, and Energy Efficiency Project Pajin, signed a landmark agreement reporting, and verification (MRV) to allocate funds through UNDP, processes and defining national The project consists of lines of credit towards the achievement of key sectoral approaches. to Industrial Development Bank of Millennium Development Goals and Turkey (TSKB) and Development related development goals in the Pilot Climate Change Adaptation Bank of Turkey (TKB) for on lending selected countries. Turkey, as one of Market Study in Turkey to private investors in order to fund the 57 eligible countries worldwide, investments in renewable energy and was awarded US$ 7,000,000 through The aim of the assignment, financed energy conservation/efficiency. These the funding window; and started the and managed jointly by EBRD and funds come from the World Bank project titled ‘Enhancing the Capacity IFC, will aim to establish a national (IBRD) and the Clean Technology Fund to Adapt to the Climate Change’. approach for managing climate-related administered by the World Bank. risks, with a specific focus on the The core objective of the programme private sector. It also aims to define The Bank loaned US$ 210 million and is to develop capacity for managing priority areas (finance, technology, IT) EUR 109.6 Million to TSKB and US$ climate change risks to rural and within this framework. 130 million and EUR 15.7 Million to coastal development in Turkey, and TKB. The Clean Technology Fund establishing long-terms strategies This assignment will establish a loaned US$ 70 Million to TSKB and for climate risk management. Various methodology to help private sector US$ 30 Million to TKB. These loans are climate change adaptation projects adopt climate strategies, which then guaranteed by the Turkish Treasury. will be implemented with this scope. can be applied to other countries. The The programme is expected to be focus will be on needs and shortfalls The project’s development objective integrated with other projects led by of the private sector with respect is to help increase privately owned academia and civil organisations, to adopting climate management and operated energy production towards achieving Millennium strategies in Turkey, as the pilot from indigenous renewable sources Development Goals. country. within the market based framework of the Turkish Electricity Market World Bank Partnership of Market Mid-size Sustainable Energy Law, enhance energy efficiency, and Readiness (PMR) Financing Facility (MidSEFF) thereby help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Eight countries received an initial EBRD launched a new financing facility grant of $ 350 million through this to support Turkey’s investments Promoting Energy Efficiency in World Bank initiative launched at the in renewable energy and energy Buildings in Turkey 2010 UN climate change conference efficiency projects to increase in Cancun, to support them develop energy savings and decrease carbon In Turkey, in terms of final energy new market-based instruments emissions. consumption, the building sector to fight climate change. The eight represents the second-largest energy countries receiving the grant include: The new Mid-size Sustainable Energy consumer - accounting for 36% of Chile, China, Columbia, Costa Rica, Financing Facility, or MidSEFF, the total final energy consumption in Indonesia, Mexico, Thailand, and will help Turkey in reducing its 2008 - and its emissions are 32% of Turkey. Each of the recipient countries dependence on fossil fuels by the total national energy-related CO2
14 emissions. However, the building b) Government Strategy in share of renewable energy in sector in Turkey presents significant electricity production, limiting GHG opportunities for cost-effective energy National Climate Change Action emissions originating from use of coal and CO2 savings. The Promoting Plan in electricity production, by using Energy Efficiency in Buildings in clean coal technologies and taking Turkey Project, financially supported “Republic of Turkey National Climate efficiency-increasing measures, by Global Environment Facility (GEF), Change Action Plan” (NCCAP) was and reducing nationwide electricity aims to reduce energy consumption developed within the framework of distribution losses to 8% by 2023. and associated GHG emissions the “Developing Turkey’s National in public buildings in Turkey by Climate Change Action Plan” project Buildings: NCCAP states that the raising building energy performance that was coordinated by Ministry of buildings sector is among the most standards, improving enforcement of Environment and Urbanization and energy intensive sectors and it shall building codes, enhancing building carried out by UNDP. be considered as a priority area for energy management and introducing all policies and programs dealing the use of an integrated building The sectors covered in the NCCAP with increasing energy efficiency and design approach. have been mainly defined in line with combating climate change. the Annex-A of the Kyoto Protocol, UNDP is the implementing agency as well as UNFCC’s national action The first purpose defined is to increase of the project. The project will be plan reporting requirements and energy efficiency in buildings. For this executed by General Directorate of measures for reducing greenhouse gas purpose several objectives are defined Electrical Power Resources Survey emissions. These sectors are energy, as follows: (i) establish heat insulation and Development Administration (EIE). industry, transportation, building, and energy-efficient systems meeting The Ministry of Public Works and waste, agriculture, land use and standards in commercial and public Settlements, Housing Development forestry. buildings with usable areas larger than Administration (TOKİ) and Ministry of 10 thousand square meters and in at National Education are other partners Under each title, the actions pertaining least 1 million residential buildings by of the project to institutional structure and policy- 2023, (ii) effective implementation of making, technology development and the Regulation on Energy Performance Industrial Energy Efficiency and transfer, financing and economic tools, in Buildings (EPB) and other energy Technology Programme data and information systems, training –efficiency regulations until 2017, (iii) and capacity building, and monitoring develop instruments that will provide The Improving Energy Efficiency and evaluation mechanisms are the necessary financial support with in Industry in Turkey project is assembled. regard to energy efficiency, renewable implemented by United Nations energy and EPB until the end of 2013, Development Programme (UNDP) and Energy: NCCAP states that pursuing (iv) issuing “Energy Performance United Nations Industrial Development emission limitation policies seems to Certificates” to all buildings until Organizations (UNIDO); and managed be the most likely option to carry on 2017, and (v) decrease annual energy by General Directorate of Electrical with efforts to combat climate change. consumption in the buildings and Power Resources Survey and premises of public institutions by 10% Development Administration (EIE) and NCCAP states that the most prominent until 2015 and by 20% until 2023. Technology Development Foundation measure regarding the sustainability of Turkey (TTGV) with the financial of energy policies employed in Another purpose defined is to increase support of GEF. Turkey is energy efficiency, and renewable energy use in buildings, covers regulatory development in the through setting a target of at least Through the project, it is aimed to area. The National Energy Efficiency 20% of the annual energy demand improve energy efficiency of the Strategy Document published in of new buildings met via renewable Turkish industry by enabling and 2004 and Law on Energy Efficiency energy resources as of 2017. encouraging companies in the published in 2007 are seemed as industrial sector to more efficiently two important steps. The Law on Industry: The first area covered in manage energy use by different energy Energy Efficiency includes the variety NCCAP is facilitating efficient use conservation measures and energy of resources available for electrical of energy, together with low carbon efficient technologies. It will further energy, increase in the number of economy projects through transition to national efforts on energy efficiency investments on renewable energy clean technologies. and support Energy Efficiency Law, sources such as hydraulic, wind, which entered into force on May 2007. geothermal, biomass and biogas. The objectives listed to increase The project will end in 2015. energy efficiency in the industry sector The objectives defined include include (i) making legal arrangements reducing primary energy intensity for energy efficiency and limitation by 10% compared to 2008 by of greenhouse gas emissions, (ii) 2015, increasing the share of clean limiting GHG emissions originating energy in energy production and from energy usage (including electrical use through ensuring an increase energy share) in the industry sector.
15 Strengthening the capacity of the considered as a sink because of means to be employed for achieving industry sector for combating climate biomass and soil. Furthermore, such targets seems to be rather change is among objectives defined by agricultural products are considered as insufficient in NCCAP. NCCAP. alternative renewable energy sources. General approach taken in NCCAP can Transportation: Road transport The primary objective, as defined be summarized by the following quote: and air transport have the largest by NCCAP, is to increase the sink “within the scope of combating climate share of emissions generated by the capacity of the agriculture sector change, Turkey’s main objective is transportation sector, whereas railroad through determining and increasing to contribute to the global efforts in is a highly efficient transportation the quantity of carbon stock line with the sustainable development activity, creating the least amount of captured in the soil, and identifying policies on the basis of common but greenhouse gas emissions. Urban and increasing topsoil and subsoil differentiated responsibilities and transportation is another important sub biomass. taking Turkey’s special circumstances heading with respect to its emissions. into account.” The absence of Land use and forestry: NCCAP states absolute reduction targets stands The first objective covered is that almost half of forests that cover out as the most important deficiency developing an inter-modal transport 27% of Turkey’s total surface area within the framework set by NCCAP. system and ensuring balanced are unproductive. They have to be utilization of transport modes in freight rehabilitated and protected. c) Regulatory developments and passenger transport, through preparing and putting in practice The objectives, as defined by NCCAP, Legislation on Measuring, Reporting the ‘Transportation Master Plan’ include (i) increasing the amount of and Verifying Greenhouse Gas until 2023. Other objectives include carbon sequestered in forests by 15% Emissions restructuring urban transportation of the 2007 value by 2020, (ii) reducing in line with sustainable transport deforestation and forest damage by Ministry of Environment and principles, dissemination of the use 20% of the 2007 values by 2020, and Urbanization announced legislation of alternative fuels and clean vehicle (iii) limiting the negative impact of land preparations for facility-level GHG technologies in the transport sector, uses and changes such as forests, measuring, reporting, and verification increasing efficiency in energy pastures, agriculture and settlements for emission intensive sectors, in line consumption of transportation sector, on climate change. with EU ETS Directive 2003/87/EC and and developing the information 2007/583/EC for measuring, reporting, infrastructure in the transport sector. Impacts of Climate Change in and verification guidelines. Turkey and Adaptation to Climate Waste: NCCAP states that the waste Change During its initial preparation stage sector plays an important role in the Ministry had the support and climate change and global warming Priority areas, as handled by substantive input from various as one of the main sectors generating this section, are water resources public organizations and sector methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide management, agriculture sector and representatives. The primary objective (CO2), the primary greenhouse gases. food security, ecosystem services, of this preparation stage is to carry biodiversity and forestry, natural out measurements in selected The objectives, as defined by disaster risk management and public facilities through a set period by the NCCAP, are (i) reducing the quantity health. Efforts to include impacts Ministry. The next stage would involve of biodegradable wastes admitted to of climate change into economic greenhouse gas calculations and landfill sites, taking year 2005 as a development strategies and national levels to be reported on the basis of basis, by 75% in weight till 2015, by development policies in Turkey are the defined methodology. Lastly, these 50% till 2018 and by 35% till 2025, gaining pace. Turkey aims to promote reports will be verified by accredited (ii) establishing integrated solid waste energy efficiency, increase the use of organizations, which will then be disposal facilities across the country, clean and renewable energy resources published as verification reports. and dispose 100% of municipal and to integrate its development wastes in these facilities, until the end policies with climate change policies. MRV regulation, expected to come into of 2023, (iii) finalizing packaging waste Policies to strengthen existing systems force by the end of 2011, will cover management plans, (iv) establishing and establishing new ones to monitor following facilities: thermal power the recycling facilities foreseen within impacts of climate change in Turkey plants, oil refineries, iron and steel the scope of the Solid Waste Master are put forward. production, gas processing facilities, Plan with the EU-aligned Integrated cement production, lime production, Waste Management approach, (v) Doubling incentives for energy glass production, ceramics production, terminating uncontrolled disposal of efficiency, reducing per capita paper manufacturing, nitrous acid, wastes 100% by 2023. greenhouse gas emission levels, adipic acid, carolactam, glyoxal and energy efficiency targets in public glyoxylic acid production. The Ministry Agriculture: Due to agricultural sector, and transportation targets are plans to hold responsible plants with activities, the agriculture sector among positive developments covered a thermal input greater than 100MW is an emission source, but is also within NCCAP. However, coverage of under the legislation, amounting to
16 approximately 700 facilities. or regional protection boards. habitat at the same time. Where there is no black and whites, we do need The legislation is expected to promote An additional incentive to promote the detailed project-level assessments. If MRV process implementations in key use of Turkish equipment states that if we exploit natural resources for short- sectors, and facilitate greenhouse gas the mechanical and electromechanical term profits, such revenues will not reductions in the long-term. components of a power plant subject be sustainable. We need continuous to the RES Support Mechanism, which communication among all parties to Renewable Energy Law commences operations before 31 find the solution.” December 2015, are manufactured Law Amending the Law on Utilization in Turkey, the tariffs will be increased While legislation on construction of Renewable Energy Resources in the amounts set out under the and management of these projects in Electricity Generation came Renewable Energy Law. The incentive do exist, lack of public and NGO into force on 8 January 2011. The is expected to promote Turkish consultation for such legislation Amendment Law introduces significant equipment manufacturing in solar preparations raises concerns. Critics amendments to improve the incentive technology. claim that assessments on impacts mechanism under the Renewable of projects on local communities Energy Law and encourage renewable d) Political developments and natural habitats are insufficient. energy investment opportunities in Planned dams are expected to have Turkey. New tariffs are introduced for Hydroelectric Power Plants major negative impacts on agricultural the sale of electricity by generation land in the areas of construction, facilities based on renewable energy Contribution methods for where agriculture is the main source resources. hydroelectric power plants, insufficient of income. Transfer of water rights environmental impact assessments, from local communities to project Facilities, which can apply to benefit and lack of public support are coordinators draws major local from the Renewable Energy Sources causes for concern and debate. reaction against these projects. While for Electiricity (RES-E) Support Many hydropower projects are dams are being constructed, many Mechanism, should hold an RES being implemented all over Turkey, lawsuits have been filed against these Certificate, and commenced/will and especially in eastern Black Sea projects. Energy Market Regulatory commence operations within the Region. Based on data from Energy Authority has already cancelled many period 18 May 2005 to 31 December Market Regulatory Authority (EMRA) of these project licenses. 2015. A generation licensee within the and General Directorate of State scope this support mechanism can Hydraulic Works, around 2000 hydro Integrating local authorities, NGOs, only benefit from the announced sale projects have been developed and and sectoral representatives in tariffs for a maximum term of 10 years constructions have started for nearly decision-making will be crucial from its operation date. The Council 400 of these. The General Directorate for successful implementation of of Ministers will determine the sale of State Hydraulic Works exhibits hydropower projects in Turkey. tariffs applicable to generation plants a positive stance towards these starting operations after 31 December hydropower projects, as a renewable Nuclear Energy 2015 but such tariffs cannot exceed source of energy, and it is confident the rates that are included in the that Turkey’s water resources are Ways to meet increasing energy amendment law. Investors however sufficient. On the other hand, lack needs of Turkey, with its high pace of claim that the Amendment Law still of sufficient technical and scientific economic growth, has been a hot topic has significant gaps, and the tariffs grounds and major deficiencies in of discussion for the past few years. are not adequate to boost renewable meeting compatibility and adequacy Nuclear energy advocates’ strongest energy investments. criteria, are bases for ongoing debates argument is that it will secure Turkey’s in Turkey. future energy. They also claim that The Amendment Law states that the nuclear energy is inevitable given total installed capacity of solar power River basin plans are claimed to be concerns around climate change. generation plants with RES Certificates inadequate for many hydropower that connect to the transmission projects in Turkey, and the need for a Disasters in Fukushima and Chernobyl line before the end of 2013 cannot comprehensive ecological evaluation have raised concerns on insecurity of exceed 600MW. The Amendment is emphasized. Ümit Boyner, the nuclear energy at a global level. The Law allows for the construction of head of Turkish Industrialists’ and global debate around nuclear energy power plants based on renewable Businessmen’s Association, states that has had an impact on nuclear energy energy resources in national and the biggest challenge in sustainability projects being planned in Turkey. natural parks, natural monuments, for Turkey is the current situation protected regions, conserved forestry, with hydro-electric plants. “..Our Opponents of nuclear power have wildlife development zones, special ability to satisfy all parties, to achieve raised a number of related concerns, environmental protection zones and sustainability, will present itself on including: increased dependence on natural protected areas provided the issue with hydro-electric power foreign technology and fuels, disposal necessary permissions are obtained plants. We need to secure Turkey’s of long-lived radioactive waste, from the Ministry of Environment and/ energy needs, and protect our natural associated high costs, and high risks
17 in nuclear plant management. Plans to build a coastal nuclear power plant in Figure 1: GHG Emissions by sector Figure 2: Renewable energy in Akkuyu, only 25 km’s from the Ercemiş (2009) Turkey by source (2009) fault-line, raises concerns such as Waste these. Wind Solar (33.9 Mt CO2e) 1% 4% Agriculture Lack of sufficient public discussion 7% and expert consultation are among (25.7 Mt CO2e) Hydro criticisms against Turkey’s nuclear 9% 31% plans. Anticipated private ownership for nuclear plant management and Industrial supervision heightens concerns, as Processes it is feared international inspection (31.7 mechanisms will not be as effective. MtCO2e) 9% 47% Anti-nuclear groups claim that reliance Biomass on nuclear energy can be reduced 17% by adopting energy conservation and energy efficiency measures. Energy 75% Geothermal efficiency can reduce the consumption Energy of energy while providing the same (278.3 Mt CO2e) level of energy services. Furthermore, Source:ETKB 2011 they favour the use of renewable Source: Turkish Statistical Institute 2011 energy, such as wind power, solar Turkey. Energy sector is responsible of electrical energy plants that power, geothermal energy and bio- generate up to 50,000 MW installed fuel. for 99.3% of emissions from fuels burnt. power in Turkey. 32,372.7 MW of this installed power (including biogas Turkey’s emissions Based on 2009 data from Ministry of and geothermic) comes from thermal Energy and Natural Resources, highest plants, 15,831.2 MW from hydraulic Turkey’s Official Inventory of National supply of energy is sourced from plants and 1,320.2 MW from wind Greenhouse Gases, covering data fossil fuels (91%), with coal’s share of power plants. Although investments from 1990 to 2009, was submitted to energy production at 31%. Hydro and in renewable energy sources have the UNFCC Secretariat in 2011. renewable energy sources supply only increased in the last couple of 9% of the total energy production. years, power generated by wind and Impacts of the financial crises on 77.4% of Turkey’s energy is imported. geothermal plants only amount to 2% emissions between 2008 and 2009 are of the installed power by the end of visible from the table below; the rate of Energy consumption in Turkey 2009. increase did decline for that period. increased by 100% between 1990 and 2009. Turkey’s energy policy has been For final energy consumption, the Total greenhouse gas emissions from largely influenced by energy security, percentages of the industrial sector Turkey increased by 97.6% between in line with Turkey’s increasing energy and building sector were 32% and 1990-2009, while emissions from the demand. 37%, respectively (ETKB, 2011). energy sector increased by 114% The CO2 emission of the building (TUIK, 2011). Within the energy sector, According to the data gathered from sector was 53.4 Mt CO2e in 2009. It electricity has the highest share of the Ministry of Energy and Natural is expected that the CO2 emission emissions. Energy sector has a 75% Resources (ETKB), there are a large of the sector will double the 2009 share in total emissions generated in number values in 2020. Looking at the data of the Ministry of Energy and
Table 3: Turkey’s emissions by sectors between 1990 - 2009 Years 1990 1995 2000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Sectors Energy 132.13 160.79 212.55 241.75 258.56 288.69 276.71 278.33 Industrial Processes 15.44 24.21 24.37 28.78 30.70 29.26 29.83 31.69 Agricultural Processes 29.78 29.68 27.37 25.84 26.50 26.31 25.04 25.70 Waste 9.68 23.83 32.72 33.52 33.88 35.71 33.92 33.93 Total 187.03 239.17 297.01 329.56 349.64 379.98 366.49 369.65
Source: Turkish Statistical Institute 2011
18 Natural Resources, it appears that public institutions, municipalities, lines to TSKB and TKB to be given to the consumption rates of oil (27%) private sector associates, NGOs and private investors in order to finance and natural gas (24%) in the building academicians. Some of the ongoing investments in renewable energy and sector are very close to each other projects targeting climate change energy efficiency. (ETKB, 2011). 24 % of the energy are: Increasing Turkey’s Adaptation consumption in the building sector Capacity to Climate Change; Agance Française de Development is met by electricity and 21% from Developing Turkey’s National Action (AFD) started to implement a pilot renewable energy sources composed Plan on Climate Change, Increasing project which aims at developing The of solar and geothermal energy, as Capacity for Fight Against Climate Regional Climate Plan with the Greater well as wood and plant-animal wastes. Change, Supporting Preparation Municipality of Gaziantep in the fight Activities of Turkey’s Second National against climate change as part of its By 2009, the ratio of the industrial Communication. In the energy field, support to the municipality sector in sector in final energy consumption the projects Increasing Energy Turkey. is 32%. Along with that, it appears Efficiency in the Industrial Sector that 44.5 % of electrical energy and Promoting Energy Efficiency in The British Embassy has provided consumption is done by the industrial Buildings are still continuing. Along grants to projects, which had positive sector (ETKB, 2011). with these joint implementation evaluations in themes of commerce, projects, the Global Environment economy, energy safety and climate Figure 3: Emissions breakdown from Facility’s Small Grants Programme change in Turkey in the framework of the industrial sector (2009) (GEF-SGP) is carried on since 1993. Prosperity Fund Turkey Programme throughout the year 2011. Along with Industrial fuel burning Energy sector European Bank for Reconstruction World Bank, British Council Ankara 16% (indirect) and Development (EBRD) and Regional Environment Centre 13% finances banks, sectors and (REC), CDP Turkey was also entitled to business enterprises and supports receive support from the fund created Agriculture privatizations, restructuring of with the aim of supporting sustainable 8% companies and development of development and improving welfare. services by working together with public companies. Some of the Centre for Regional Cooperation Waste projects that EBRD supports in Turkey (REC Turkey) and Ministry 10% Turkey in the field of climate change of Environment and Forestry are the and environment are: Mid-Size prime beneficiaries of the project Sustainable Energy Financing Facility entitled Capacity Building for (MidSEFF); Pilot Climate Change Environmental Stakeholders which Other energy Adaptation Market Study which will be was created with the goal of increasing 53% implemented and financed together the capacity of all the stakeholders in Source: Turkish Statistical Institute 2011 with IFC; and Turkey Sustainable issues of environmental management Energy Financing Facility (TurSEFF) and sustainable development during Greenhouse gas emissions caused providing credit facility of 200 billion the process of Turkey’s accession to by the transportation sector in Turkey dollars for buildings and the private EU. The project, which will be carried are equal to 17% of total emissions sector in Turkey to be distributed on between the years 2009 and 2011, (TÜİK, 2011). Although the amount of through project partner local banks. is supported by EU’s Instrument emissions caused by transportation is for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) relatively low when compared to the International Finance Corporation Programme. amount in developed countries, the (IFC) chose Turkey as the centre rate of increase is high. In the 19-year where Europe, Middle East and WWF – Turkey (World Wildlife period between 1990 and 2009, CO2 North Africa (EMENA) region will be Fund) started a granted programme equivalent greenhouse gas emissions administered. In the coming three in September as part of Turkey’s Life caused by the transportation sector years, IFC plans to invest 3 billion campaign aiming to create awareness increased by 44% throughout the dollars in Turkey. The support given about biological diversity and protect world, whereas during the same period to financial institutions and SMEs in the country’s natural heritage. Within CO2 equivalent greenhouse gas Turkey will be increased in Istanbul this scope, the projects of the NGO’s emissions caused by transportation and rural areas. In Turkey, IFC also in Anatolia will be supported. In increased by 78% in Turkey (ITF, plans to conduct studies on renewable 2011, WWF-Turkey also started a 2008). energy with Akenerji, along with project entitled Renewable Energy EnerjiSa. In the following period, works Project in order to evaluate renewable The Role of Institutions in the related to hydroelectric plants and energy projects in Turkey and realise Fight against Climate Change wind power are expected to follow. renewable energy potential.
United Nations Development World Bank (WB) started the second Program (UNDP) Turkey; works in leg of the Private Sector Renewable close cooperation with numerous Energy and Energy Efficiency Project in 2009. The project will provide credit 19 The Activities of Sabanci University
Since 2010, Sabanci University continues the local partnership of CDP Turkey Project. Sabanci University’s Istanbul International Center for Energy and Climate Change was founded under the honorary guidance of International Energy Agency (IEA)’s chief economist Dr. Fatih Birol. The centre is planned to make highest quality and objective economical and political research in the fields of energy and climate and to become a future-oriented independent research and policy centre. The centre, which will cooperate with governments in the region and across the globe, as well as companies, research institutions and international organisations, aims to inform government bodies and business sectors about central issues in energy and climate change. The Centre’s International Guidance Committee is comprised of energy specialists.
Under the chairmanship of the Municipality of Energy in Turkey, a team comprised of members from Sabanci University, TÜBİTAK, TAI, İTÜ and Istanbul Transportation is about to found National Wind Power System (MİLRES). Local production of wind tribunes is planned with a 50 billion lira budget on Wind Power Plants (RES). Conducting works on design and technology development with a staff of 121 academicians, the team is planning to operate the first 500 kilowatt National Wind Power System at the end of the next year. Since the whole production will be carried out by local industrialists, the aim is to build a local wind tribune sub-industry. The coordination of MİLRES project and the whole design of tribunes’ mechanical components is undertaken by Sabanci University. Moreover, Sabanci University also started a civic initiative entitled Wind Power Technology Platform (RETEP) in order build cooperation with the sector, in addition to research and development. 11 local and foreign industrialists, who take part in this platform, will undertake the production of necessary parts.
References:
EEA, The European Environment, State and Outlook 2010 EU, Energy 2020, a strategy for competitive, sustainable and secure energy, Brussels, COM 2010 Eurostat, Environmental statistics and accounts in Europe, 2010 Eurostat, Europe in figures — Eurostat yearbook 2010 IBRD, IFC, Country Partnership Strategy Progress Report with the Republic of Turkey 2088- 2011, 2009. UN, Report of the Conference of the Parties on its sixteenth session, held in Cancun from 29 November to 10 December 2010. Partnership for Market readiness (PMR) Template for Scoring of Market readiness activities, 2011 Republic of Turkey - MoEF (2010) Strategic Plan 2010-2014 Republic of Turkey (2007) First National Communication of Turkey on Climate Change Republic of Turkey (2010) National Climate Change Strategy Document 2010-2020 Republic of Turkey (2010) Ministry of Energy and Natural resources Strategic Plan 2010-2014 Republic of Turkey (2011) Climate Change National Action Plan 2011-2020 TURKSTAT (2009) Green House Gas Emission Inventory 2, News Bulletin. 2011 World Bank Turkey Partnership: Country Program Snapshot, 2011 www.cevresehircilik.gov.tr (accessed in 21.09.2011) www.ormansu.gov.tr (accessed in 10.10.2011) www.undp.org.tr (accessed in 06.10.2011) ec.europa.eu/dgs/clima/mission/ (accessed in 19.09.2011) unfccc.int/meetings/cancun_nov_2010/items/6005.php (accessed in 11.10.2011)
20 2011 Carbon Disclosure Leadership
Introduction to the Carbon What does a CDP carbon disclosure Disclosure Scoring score represent? Carbon Disclosure Leaders in Turkey This year for the first time in Turkey, Generally, companies scoring within company responses to the Investor a particular range exhibit similar levels (in alphabetical order) CDP information request are scored of commitment to, and experience according to the scoring methodology of, carbon disclosure. The indicative that CDP has developed with guidance description of each level is provided Akbank from PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP below for guidance only; investors (PwC), in its capacity as CDP’s should read individual company Coca-Cola Içecek Global Advisor. This results in a responses to understand the context disclosure score that reflects the for each business. Companies comprehensiveness of a company’s with disclosure scores over 70, in T. Garanti Bankası response. alphabetical order on the right hand side. Türk Telekomünikasyon Disclosure scores How is the disclosure score Zorlu Enerji Elektrik Üretim • Disclosure scores are an assessment determined? of the quality and completeness of a company’s response; they are not a In determining the disclosure score for measure of a company’s performance in each company, we assess the following: relation to climate change management • The level of understanding and • Scores are plotted over a 100-point disclosure of company-specific normalized scale exposure to climate-related risks and • Companies are assessed based opportunities on their level of disclosure of carbon • The level of strategic focus and emissions measurement techniques and commitment to understanding the subsequent public disclosure business issues related to climate change, emanating from the top of the More information related to scoring organisation can be found in the CDP information • The extent to which a company has request, supporting methodology and measured its carbon emissions guidance documents, as well as within • The extent of the internal individual company responses at www. data management practices for cdproject.net. understanding GHG emissions, including energy use Analysis of the responses which score • The frequency and relevance of highly on disclosure provides insights disclosure to key corporate stakeholders into the characteristics and common • Whether the company uses third trends among the leading companies on party or external verification of emissions carbon disclosure, and highlights good data to promote greater confidence and practices in reporting, governance, risk usage of the data management and other areas. 2011 is the first year that company responses are scored for disclosure in Turkey and five companies displayed leadership on disclosure achieving a score of 70 or higher.
21 Company Responses Overview & Key Findings - Turkey 2011
In 2011, CDP Turkey - the result “CDP was an important Figure 4: Respondents of collaboration between Sabancı CDP 2011 and CDP 2010 turning point in the University and CDP - targeted the 100 largest companies listed on the efforts to systematically Number of companies Istanbul Stock Exchange (ISE), to solicit address the sustainability information regarding: 100 CDP 2010 CDP 2011 transformation that had • Corporate level climate change 80 been brought to life management and governance, 60 within Türk Telekom. • The opportunities and risks as perceived stemming from climate 40 During the CDP process, change and the strategies being which was started contemplated to manage these 20 opportunities and risks, 0 in 2010, all business • Emission reduction strategies, and processes leading to • Direct and indirect GHG emissions Respondents Volunteers Sample size with emission intensity, energy carbon emissions were consumption and costs thereof. (the 50 companies that received the reviewed and a high level information request for the first time As of February, 2011, the ISE- in 2011) of the ISE-100 was low. As a of awareness was raised 100 companies’ combined market result, CDP 2011 Turkey achieved an within the company on capitalisation is around US$ 48.3 billion, overall response rate of 17% which ISE-100 - includes companies from represents a slight decrease (3%) carbon emissions. We various sectors; consumer discretionary, from CDP 2010, and ranks Turkey in believe that the awareness consumer staples, energy, financials, the middle in terms of response rates health care, industrials, materials, observed in developing and emerging raised by the CDP process telecommunication services, utilities. countries in 2011. And also the shall also demonstrate This section of the report analyses response rate of ISE-50 increased to responses to CDP Information Request 30% in 2011, from 20% in 2010. the importance of in 2011, with a specific focus on sectors communication when possible. The response rate is likely to improve in the coming years as companies become technologies in reducing Response Rates more aware of and sensitive to the issue carbon emissions. of climate change, and gain familiarity The number of invitees increased from with the CDP questionnaire. The depth Accordingly, we believe 50 largest companies constituting the and the quality of responses have been that the significance of ISE-50 index of ISE in 2010 to 100 mixed which is understandable since largest companies constituting ISE-100 one third of the participating companies products and services index in 2011. The response rate from (excluding the voluntary respondents) offered by Turkey’s companies is influenced by a range of are new to CDP request in Turkey. factors including company’s perception leading convergence and awareness of climate related issues, In addition to the 17 ISE 100 and communication as well as available resources within the respondents, there were three company. voluntary responses in CDP 2011 from technologies company companies that are not included in the Türk Telekom shall be Out of the 100 companies invited to ISE 100: Akçansa Çimento Sanayi respond to the CDP 2011 information ve Ticaret A.Ş., Brisa Bridgestone better understood.” request, 17 accepted the invitation Sabancı Lastik Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş., and 83 did not. Although the absolute Yünsa Yünlü Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. number of the companies (7) increased, The increase in voluntary responses Gökhan Bozkurt the contribution from the second tier from one in 2010 (Yünsa Yünlü Sanayi CEO, Türk Telekom 22 “As Akenerji, being aware Table 4: Respondent companies of our responsibility Respondents both in 2010 & 2011 New Respondents in 2011 towards society, we are Akbank T.A.Ş. Akenerji Elektrik Üretim A.Ş. Bağfaş Bandırma Gübre Fabrikaları A.Ş. Akçansa Çimento Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. (v) deeply committed to Kardemir Karabük Demir Çelik Sanayi ve Ticaret Brisa Bridgestone Sabancı Lastik Sanayi ve A.Ş. Ticaret A.Ş. (v) preventing environmental Petkim Petrokimya Holding A.Ş. Coca-Cola Içecek A.Ş. pollution and protecting Sabancı Holding A.Ş. Mondi Tire Kutsan Kağıt ve Ambalaj Sanayi A.Ş. ** Şekerbank T.A.Ş. T.Şişe ve Cam Fabrikalari A.Ş. the natural resources. T. Garanti Bankası A.Ş. Tesco Kipa** Within this scope, we Tav Hava Limanları Holding A.Ş. Türk Telekomünikasyon A.Ş. Türk Ekonomi Bankası A.Ş. are supporting a clean T. Sınai Kalkınma Bankası A.Ş. Yünsa Yünlü Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş.(v) and sustainable energy Zorlu Enerji Elektrik Üretim A.Ş.* future by investing in (*) Responded as part of the Global Electric Utilities 250 sample (**) Respondents via their parent company renewable energy and we (v) Volunteer are evaluating the impacts ve Ticaret A.Ş) to three in 2011 is an on the environment and encouraging development. These Figure 5: Number of respondents by voluntary respondents are publicly listed sector natural life, as much as we companies consolidated to Sabancı Financials consider the energy we Holding, a ISE 100 constituent and Materials a respondent itself. However, as the Industrials produce and the service voluntary respondents are not included Utilities we provide. We believe in the ISE 100 index, their inputs are Consumer staples excluded from our analysis. Consumer discretionary we have highlighted our Telecommunications sensitivity in this field by Two companies in the Turkey Top 100 Energy CDP 2011 AQ CDP 2010 AQ sample, namely Mondi Tire Kutsan Healthcare announcing our policies and Tesco Kipa, are subsidiaries of 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Number of companies related to greenhouse gas global companies that are invited by (*) Excluding the voluntary responses and two and responded to CDP directly. Since companies responded through their parents. emissions and climate their Turkey emissions are consolidated (AQ) Answered questionnaire change through Carbon to the parent companies’ emissions, we consider those companies as Disclosure Project. We are responding, but exclude them from our Figure 6: Number of respondents proud of leading the sector analysis. and other companies in There are variations in the response 10% order to leave a more rates of sectors. While none of the companies in the health care sector habitable world to the 15% have accepted CDP’s invitation to next generations.” disclose, 50% of the utility companies have responded. Ahmet Ümit Danışman,
75% General Manager, Akenerji
ISE-100 direct responses Non ISE-100 respondents ISE-100 companies whose responses were incorporated in the response of their international parent companies 23 Highlights of 2011 disclosures
“Rather than being just The key trends and responses to CDP As presented in the figure below, 45% 2011 questionnaire are analysed with (7) of the companies who assign climate an environmental issue, respect to companies’ governance, change management responsibility to a climate change has strategy, targets and initiatives, board member are financial institutions, communication, climate change risks, whereas this figure is 11% for other become one of the climate change opportunities and sectors. leading issues of today’s emissions and reported accordingly in the following sections. sustainable development Figure 8: Sectoral distribution of the companies having executives concept. On account Governance on their Board for climate change management of the increasing risks Companies are asked the following and –also-opportunities, questions about climate change,
development and 1. Who is responsible for climate 11% integration of a sustainable change issues in their company, 11% 2. What type of incentives are offered 11% carbon and energy to the management for climate change strategy which is a management performance 45% 11% necessity of low carbon As displayed in the chart below, 60% of economy, should be the the responding companies assign such responsibilities to a board committee or 11% prior action of a long term other high level executive body whereas sustainability policy. Apart 40% of the responding companies 11% assign the responsibility to lower level from being a financial departments in 2011, compared to 73% Consumer discretionary and 27% respectively in 2010. guide for investors, it can Industrials be said that, the projects The responses defined high-level Materials members as the members of the board such as Carbon Disclosure Consumer staples of directors, the CEO and other senior Project, raise awareness officers who are responsible for dealing Financials in the global market and with sustainability issues related with Utilities their business. encourage the companies The responses suggest a higher level for developing sustainable of awareness of climate change risks Figure 7: The highest level of in Turkey’s financial sector which is strategies on climate responsibility for climate change reflected in their governance choices. change and source within the company 73 % (11) of the surveyed companies have incentives for the management on utilization.” climate change issues, whereas four companies advise that they have “no 2011 Ahmet Kırman, incentive”. General Manager, Figure 9 illustrates the types of incentives in those 11 companies. Şişecam Four companies report that they have 2010 monetary incentives for climate change management performance.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Other, lower level departments Board committee or executive body
24 Figure 9: Types of incentives for Figure 10: Engagement with policy “As Yünsa, we are climate change issues makers extremely pleased to participate in the Carbon Not answered Disclosure Project, Yes 9% 7% world’s leading initiatives implemented in Turkey under the leadership of 46% 36% Sabanci University. Yünsa 55% 47% being the first participant from textile sector, once
No again demonstrated its
Recognition (non-monetary) leading position in this Monetary reward matter. Today, we know Other non-monetary reward that it is impossible to Strategy Targets and Initiatives stay away from the effects of climate change. One of The CDP questionnaire requests In the third section, companies are disclosure of information regarding asked whether they had an emission the leading indicators of risk management strategies related reduction target for the reporting being an environmentally to climate change, and opportunities year. Companies answering that they stemming from climate change. 11 have either “absolute” or ‘intensity’ friendly company is to companies report that they have targets are asked to provide more measure our impacts on either integrated multi-disciplinary information about the target, as well risk management processes or that as their progress against the target climate change and keep they have adopted a specific climate during the reporting year. If no targets them under control as change risk management process. are identified, the reasoning for not Four companies state that they do having a reduction target is requested. much as possible.Yünsa is not have any documented policies or Responding companies report that moving towards becoming processes related with climate change they have set environmental goals to management. reduce their consumption of natural a world leader in its resources and carbon emissions. The sector without ignoring 11 out of 15 respondents disclose majority of the responding companies that climate change is integrated into set environmental goals of switching to the social responsibilities their business strategy, whereas four low carbon energy, developing carbon to its stakeholders. We respondents state that it is not. free product designs and reducing overall energy consumption. They will continue to maintain Figure 10 shows number of respondents also highlight that they are working on the internal discipline and who engage with policy makers to raising employee awareness and that encourage further action on mitigation their environmental targets are observed keep on participating in and/or adoption. periodically and revised as required. the Carbon Disclosure Project.”
Cem Çelikoğlu, General Manager, Yünsa 25 “The Carbon Disclosure Communications Climate Change Risks Project is an important Within the communication section, Climate Change Risks are divided into part of our on-going the companies were asked whether three categories in CDP questionnaire: they have published information about Regulatory, Physical and Other Risks. commitment to address their companies’ responses to climate Company responses related to those global climate change. It change and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) risks are analysed separately below. emissions performance for this reporting has been an incredibly year in places other than in their CDP Similar to other developing countries, useful tool in challenging submission. As illustrated in Figure 8 climate change poses several potential below, the majority of the companies (7) risks for companies in Turkey. These us to continually expand, do not publish climate change related risks may be regulatory or physical and deepen and accelerate information through any other means may be faced directly by companies than CDP platform. On the other hand, themselves or indirectly through our efforts. We are proud four respondents publish information their business partners, suppliers to be included in the CDP in both their annual reports and in and customers and their operations voluntary communications; two publish elsewhere. 2011 Global 500 Report information only in annual reports and and look forward to future the remaining two only in voluntary In 2011 companies report that “risks communications. Out of six companies driven by changes in physical climate participation.” who publish climate change information parameters” are the most significant risk in some voluntary communication, related with climate change. This is in four have already completed their line with responses in 2012. Ergun Özen, reports for the current year and CEO, Garanti Bank attached the respective reports to their Figure 12: Companies’ perception of CDP responses, whereas two of the significant risks related to climate companies’ reports are underway as of change the response date of this questionnaire and as such they attached the previous Number of Companies
year’s report. 14 12 Figure 11: Information related to 10 climate change in places other than 8 the CDP responses 6 4 2 Not published 0
regulation physical other climate Not Only voluntary climate related answered communication parameters developments
Only in As presented in Figure 12, 11 annual reports companies state that regulatory Voluntary requirements related to climate communication change pose significant risks for their & annual reports 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 industries. Climate change related Number of Companies regulatory risks generally arise from current and expected national, global and multilateral policies agreed by
26 the governments. Respondents also Climate Change Opportunities “Creating long-lasting value indicate that regulatory uncertainty that nurtures the welfare of presents a key challenge for many While climate change poses several future generations as well companies in Turkey. Furthermore, risks, it also presents opportunities for as respecting the sensitive majority of the respondents note that the business community. In general, the main regulatory risk is related to the impact of climate change on a balance between nature and Turkey’s ratification of Kyoto Protocol company will depend upon the nature society is an indispensable (international agreements) and possible of its business activities, its geographic part of Akbank’s corporate use of carbon taxes. location, the regulatory environment culture. Focusing on creating to which it is subject to, the market sustainable value since 12 companies state that physical in which steps have been taken to its inception, Akbank has requirements related to change in proactively respond to and/or mitigate precipitation extremes and droughts climate change related issues. pioneered initiatives that are the most significant risks for them. enhance all stakeholders’ and Damage, disruption and displacement As displayed in Figure 13 below, the future generations’ quality resulting on account of unpredictable most significant opportunity is reported of life with its operations, extreme weather events directly lead to be the “regulatory opportunity” by the business processes and the to physical risks. Most companies also respondents. highlight the risk of increased frequency social responsibility projects it in extreme weather events - resulting undertakes and supports. With in increased operational cost, reduced Figure 13: Types of climate change this vision, Akbank participates demand for goods and disruption in opportunities actively in endeavors for production capacity. sustainable development on Number of Companies both domestic and international Türk Telekomünikasyon A.Ş. states that 14 one of the significant risk factors for their platforms. We continue our 12 support to Carbon Disclosure industry is the financial risk that might 10 arise from a potential cap and trade 8 Project (CDP), launched in scheme in Turkey. To mitigate this risk 6 Turkey for the first time in 2010 the company has implemented various 4 with Akbank’s sponsorship and emission reduction initiatives, such as 2 known as the most extensive installation of high efficiency rectifiers, 0 and prestigious corporate and on-site electricity production using regulation changes in other climate no renewable sources. physical climate related answer environmental Project. Ranking parameters developments among the global leaders in Eight companies also list a variety of Carbon Disclosure Project other risks such as reputational risk, 12 respondents indicate that regulatory (CDP) – one of the most change in customer behaviours and decisions related to climate change significant global projects – for uncertainty in market signals which present significant opportunities for their two years in a row reinforces would result in changes in the demand industries. for goods and services. As a result, our efforts and commitment for companies that do not take actions Regulatory opportunities generally a more sustainable environment against the climate change and do arise from capacity to respond better goal.” not adapt to the regulations, may be to the current and expected local or exposed to reputational risks. international governmental policies on climate change. The responses of the Ziya Akkurt, companies underline the fact that local General Manager, regulation related to climate change, if imposed, will be seen as an opportunity Akbank as well as a threat.
27 Opportunities driven by changes in are comparable across businesses “Akçansa, being aware of physical climate parameters arise from including accounting procedures, the utmost importance the physical effects of climate change, global warming potentials, and use of of the climate change such as changing weather patterns. emission factors. As shown in Figure 14 Examples for these opportunities below, the most preferred methodology adaptation and mitigation include increased demand for particular is the Greenhouse Gas Protocol. actions, shows persistence products and services, or improved Some companies collect activity data to integrate sustainability conditions for production and other and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 and carbon management business. Financial institutions identify emission with more than one method aspects in its business opportunities such as increased demand such as World Resources Institute (WRI) strategy. Our strategy for appropriate products and services Transport tool. (for example insurance products), as includes innovative and low well as reduced operational cost. carbon investments such Figure 14: Methodology used to as alternative fuel usage, Eight companies report that there collect activity data and calculate reduction in clinker rate in Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions might be other significant opportunities cement and energy efficienc. regarding climate change. 90% In this content, Waste For example, Coca Cola İçecek A.Ş. considers their energy and water 80% CDP 2010 Heat Power Generation 70% CDP 2011 efficiency as a competitive advantage. 60% Plant and Sewage Sludge 50% Plant projects have been Other opportunities, identified by the 40% best in their class and very other responding companies, include 30% important examples that reputational opportunities, changes 20% 10% other companies in the in human and cultural environment, 0% sector also followed. Waste increasing humanitarian demands and The Greenhouse Defra Voluntary ISO 14064 -1 Other changing consumer behaviour. Gas Protocol Reporting Heat Power Generation Plant Guidelines has been the first industrial Emissions application in Turkey, and has been qualified to be The responses indicate that all sectors Direct GHG emissions (Scope 1) are verified as a VER Project have begun to put systems in place for generated in companies’ production by Gold Standard. Being a GHG emission tracking and strategies process. Scope 2 GHG emissions pioneer player in the sector, for implementing low-carbon strategies. do not physically occur within the However, protocols or methodologies organization’s reporting boundary in 2010 we declared our used to collect emission data and and therefore are considered to be environmental, social and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 “indirect emissions”. Other indirect GHG economical performance emissions vary from company to emissions (Scope 3) are from sources and commitments in our company. The majority of the companies that are not owned or controlled by an sustainability report 2007- have a base year of 2009-2010, which organization, but which occur as a result 2009. CDP report has been indicates an increased attention to the of its activities, e.g. the manufacturing, GHG emission in recent years. Another production and transport of purchased a great opportunity to share notable trend is verification. 40% (six) fuels, goods or raw materials, or the our performance and targets of the CDP-Turkey respondents have use of product and services sold, on carbon management” reported to have verified their Scope 1 and business travels in vehicles not or Scope 2 emissions. belonging to or managed by the company. Hakan Gürdal, The CDP questionnaire requests General Manager, information on the methodology of Companies were asked about their GHG emissions data collection and energy expenses as a percentage of Akçansa the GHG measuring tools used which their total operational expenses. The
28 “As Zorlu Energy Group, we responses are within a wide range of Conclusions act with the responsibility percentages starting from ‘more than 0% but less than or equal to 5%’ to As mentioned within the introduction of the critical relationship ‘more than 95%, but less than or equal section above, in 2010 ISE-50 index between climate change and to 100%’ with an average of 25-30% for companies were invited to disclose the energy production; focus the 13 companies who responded to their climate change policies and on fair energy production this question. carbon emissions through CDP. In 2011, the sample was expanded to with our growth strategy As illustrated in Figure 15 below, ISE-100 companies, however; many which prioritize clean energy companies were asked about the large industrial companies in Turkey resources to make energy changes in their absolute emissions. are not listed. This situation leads to supply safe and sustainable. Of the 14 companies responding to unwillingness of listed companies this question, three stated that it is the to disclose since they perceive Carbon Disclosure Project, first year of their emissions estimation. additional disclosure as a competitive is the significant indicator Excluding these companies, 64% of the disadvantage against unlisted of our determination and respondents’ report that their absolute companies. Nevertheless, the number transparency. As the first emissions (Scope 1 and Scope 2 of respondents increased from 10 to 17 combined) have decreased compared to companies with a slight decrease in the Turkish energy company the previous year, which demonstrates overall response rate due to increased participated in the project, significant improvement for the emission sample size. This makes it clear that we exposed our strategies reduction strategies. there is increased awareness on the related to climate change climate change and carbon emissions Finally, many of the companies do not in the corporate world with room for and greenhouse effect anticipate participating in any emission improvement. to public and investors. trading schemes in the next two years, We will be protecting our with the exception of one company who Finally, in undertaking the analysis for the transparency principle is already participating and two others second year’s report, we have sought which expect to participate in the next to find a balance between these two about this subject in the two years. objectives; identifying the actions taken near future. We carry on by the companies on climate issues our preparations about Figure 15: Change in absolute in order to encourage these activities, developing tools for risk emissions (Scope 1 & 2 combined) while striving to highlight the nature and the extent of the remaining challenge. management and invigorate Number of Companies our corporate structure 7 related to climate change. 6 We will not be compromising 5 our harmony and the 4 struggle targeted responsible 3 2 way of action that have an 1 eye on our ecological and 0 social justice with our ethical Increased Decreased First year Now answered of estimation sense of business towards climate change.”
Arif Özozan, General Manager, Zorlu Energy 29 Ernst & Young Turkey commentary Mustafa Çamlıca, Country Leader
We, as Ernst &Young Turkey, are both for the risks and opportunities proud to be the report writing embraced and accordingly these are sponsor of CDP 2011 Turkey report. becoming boards’ agenda. Results of The report incorporates responses a global survey1 among 300 global from companies among IMKB 100 executives across 16 countries, compared to IMKB 50 of prior year. showed that executives and boards are strongly aware of the growing Since this is the second year of demand for more transparent reporting CDP Turkey report, it includes of climate change business strategies, comparative information unlike last initiatives and performance. It also year. In addition, this is the first year revealed that executive leadership is that the responses are scored for critical to realizing the full potential the quality of carbon disclosure. The of the business response to climate scoring was done based on the Global change. Responses to CDP 2011 Scoring Methodology. It should be questionnaire also supports the role of noted that disclosure scoring does executives in IMKB 100 companies as not measure companies’ climate majority of the respondents assigned change management performance board or high level executive body for rather assesses the quality and climate change issues. completeness of response. 25% of the respondents got scores in the Being in the boards’ agenda and high range (>70) as defined by Global having such awareness, we expect Scoring Methodology. Although total that non response rate, whether due to number of respondents is still not transparency matters or due to lacking at the desirable level compared to the necessary information to respond, other markets where CDP reports are will decrease in the coming periods, as published, the percentage presenting the stakeholder pressure will increase the disclosure quality, 25%, is on the companies for more information amazing. on climate change regardless of regulations. In today’s environment, sustainability and climate change strategies are not 1 Action Amid Uncertainty business response to climate change www.ey.com/ “nice to have” but “must to have” ccassexecutivesurvey.
30 The Way Forward
“I am very pleased to Allocation of financial resources, either 2. Global corporations are increasingly through lending or through investments, interested in reducing their supply participate in CDP Turkey, to companies that manage climate chain footprint, and over 50 of them, particularly as the first change risks better, is one of the drivers including Wal-Mart, Dell, and PepsiCo, of low carbon growth. Increasing currently requests climate information company to do so in awareness of Turkey’s vulnerability from their suppliers through CDP to the food sector. Carbon to climate change within Turkey and manage their supply chain emissions. growing sense of urgency on a global There are already a significant number of emission reduction has scale are the drivers for the Turkish Turkish companies, who are requested a key management private sector to consider climate to disclose to CDP as suppliers of change as a matter of sustainability these global corporations. CDP’s focus and we have been of their existence. Turkey’s strong operation in Turkey is an opportunity for systematically decreasing growth projections and availability of companies to realize their climate risks development finance for adaptation and opportunities; and gain competitive our carbon emissions provide ample opportunities for Turkey’s advantage. Therefore, there is a need every year. Furthermore, private sector to invest in low carbon to (a) prioritize sectors with respect growth. to their share and importance within we are the first company global supply chains and national in Turkey to report CDP’s coverage of Turkey provides the export potentials (b) build capacity opportunity for companies to assess and create awareness of climate- emissions from our Turkish their climate performance through a related risks and opportunities in production facilities in systematic framework. The following selected sectors, (c) support them are Turkey-specific issues, which we in implementing measurement and 2007. We recognize that need to address for ensuring that CDP- management strategies addressing climate change has a Turkey project reaches its potential for climate-issues, and (d) encouraging supporting Turkey’s national climate their disclosure through CDP, which will serious impact on our strategy: eventually increase their visibility and company, our supply chain competitiveness in the global market 1. Turkish stock market is not place. and our communities; representative of the Turkish business; thus we work relentlessly bank finance is the main source of Given Investor CDP’s established finance. Furthermore, most Turkish presence in Turkey thanks to our to fullfill our share of business owners prefer to keep physical sponsors Akbank and Ernst & Young responsibility by using the assets (i.e. manufacturing companies) Turkey Office, and additional funding under private ownership. Often, resources from the British Embassy optimum energy sources marketing and sales functions are - Prosperity Fund to address the and by increasing energy organized under a separate entity which challenges explained above (with a is then listed in the stock exchange; project called ‘Expanding CDP’), we will efficiency in production while the plants and manufacturing continue to expand our activities in the and distribution channels.” facilities are privately held. As a result, years to come. climate-critical sectors are left out from CDP’s Turkey sample. Therefore, there is Michael A. O’Neill, a great need to (a) create incentives for non-listed companies in climate-critical CEO, Coca-Cola İçecek sectors to join CDP (b) raise awareness within the banking sector as key source of finance in Turkey, and encourage use of CDP data in their financing decisions.
31 Appendix I: Table of emissions, scores and sector information by company
Please refer to the Key on page 35 for further explanation of the abbreviations used.
Company Sector 2011 Response status 2010 Response status Permission Status Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3 ADVANSA SASA POLYESTER SANAYİ A.Ş. Materials NR X AFYON ÇİMENTO SANAYİ T.A.Ş. Materials NR X AKBANK T.A.Ş. Financials AQ AQ NP Disclosed Disclosed Disclosed AKENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş. Utilities AQ NR NP Disclosed AKSA AKRİLİK KİMYA SANAYİİ A.Ş. Materials DP X AKSİGORTA A.Ş. Financials DP DP ALARKO HOLDİNG Financials NR X ALBARAKA TÜRK Financials DP X ANADOLU ANONİM TÜRK SİGORTA ŞİRKETİ Financials NR DP ANADOLU EFES BİRACILIK VE MALT SANAYİİ A.Ş. Consumer Staples DP DP ANADOLU HAYAT EMEKLİLİK Financials NR X ARÇELİK A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary NR DP ASELSAN ELEKTRONİK SANAYİ VE TİCARET A.Ş. Industrials NR X ASYA KATILIM BANKASI A.Ş. Financials NR NR AYGAZ A.Ş. Utilities NR DP BAGFAŞ BANDIRMA GÜBRE FABRİKALARI A.Ş. Materials AQ AQ Disclosed Disclosed Disclosed BANVİT BANDIRMA VİTAMİNLİ YEM SANAYİİ A.Ş. Consumer Staples DP X BİM BİRLEŞİK MAĞAZALAR A.Ş. Consumer Staples NR NR BSH EV ALETLERİ SANAYİ VE TİCARET A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary DP X ÇELEBİ HAVA SERVİSİ A.Ş. Industrials NR X COCA-COLA İÇECEK A.Ş. Consumer Staples AQ DP Disclosed Disclosed Disclosed DEVA HOLDİNG A.Ş. Health Care NR X DOĞAN GAZETECİLİK Consumer Discretionary NR X DOĞAN ŞİRKETLER GRUBU HOLDİNG A.Ş. Industrials DP DP DOĞAN YAYIN HOLDİNG A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary DP DP DOĞUŞ OTOMOTİV Consumer Discretionary DP X ECZACIBAŞI YATIRIM HOLDİNG ORTAKLIĞI A.Ş. Financials DP X EGE GÜBRE SANAYİİ A.Ş. Materials NR X EGE SERAMİK SANAYİ VE TİCARET A.Ş. Materials NR X EİS ECZACIBAŞI İLAÇ, SINAİ VE FİNANSAL YATIRIMLAR Health Care DP DP SANAYİ VE TİCARET A.Ş. ENKA İNŞAAT VE SANAYİ A.Ş. Industrials NR NR EREĞLİ DEMİR VE ÇELİK FABRİKALARI T.A.Ş. Materials DP DP FENERBAHÇE SPORTİF HİZMETLER SANAYİ VE TİCARET Consumer Discretionary DP X A.Ş. FİNANS FİNANSAL KİRALAMA A.Ş. Financials NR X FORD OTOMOTİV SANAYİ A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary DP DP FORTIS BANK A.Ş. Financials NR X GALATASARAY SPORTİF SINAİ VE YATIRIMLAR A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary NR X GLOBAL YATIRIM HOLDİNG A.Ş. Financials NR X GOLDAŞ KUYUMCULUK SANAYİ İTHALAT İHRACAT A.Ş. Materials NR X GÖLTAŞ GÖLLER BÖLGESİ ÇİMENTO SAN. VE TİC.A.Ş. Materials NR X GSD HOLDİNG A.Ş. Financials NR X GÜBRE FABRİKALARI T.A.Ş. Materials NR NR HÜRRİYET GAZETECİLİK VE MATBAACILIK A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary NR NR İHLAS EV ALETLERİ İMALAT SANAYİ VE TİCARET A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary NR NR
32 Appendix II: Table of emissions, scores and sector information by company
Company Sector 2011 Response status 2010 Response status Permission Status Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3 İHLAS HOLDİNG Financials NR X İPEK MATBAACILIK SANAYİ VE TİCARET A.Ş. Materials NR X İŞ FİNANSAL KİRALAMA A.Ş. Financials NR X İŞ GAYRİMENKUL YATIRIM ORTAKLIĞI A.Ş. Financials NR X IŞIKLAR YATIRIM HOLDİNG A.Ş. Financials NR X İTTİFAK HOLDİNG Financials NR X KARDEMİR KARABÜK DEMİR ÇELİK SANAYİ VE TİCARET Materials AQ AQ NP Disclosed Disclosed A.Ş. KARSAN OTOMOTİV SANAYİİ VE TİCARET A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary NR X KARTONSAN KARTON SANAYİ VE TİCARET A.Ş. Materials NR X KOÇ HOLDİNG A.Ş. Industrials NR DP KONYA ÇİMENTO SANAYİİ A.Ş. Materials NR X KOZA ALTIN İŞLETMELERİ A.Ş. Materials NR X KOZA ANADOLU METAL MADENCİLİK İŞLETMELERİ A.Ş. Industrials NR NR MARTI OTEL İŞLETMELERİ A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary NR X METRO TİCARİ VE MALİ YATIRIMLAR A.Ş. Financials NR X MİGROS TİCARET A.Ş. Consumer Staples NR X MONDİ TİRE KUTSAN KAĞIT VE AMBALAJ SANAYİ A.Ş. Materials AQ(SA) X NET HOLDİNG A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary NR NR NET TURİZM TİCARET VE SANAYİ A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary NR X NORTEL NETWORKS NETAŞ TELEKOMÜNİKASYON A.Ş. Telecommunication NR X Services OTOKAR OTOMOTİV VE SAVUNMA SANAYİ A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary NR X PARK ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM MADENCİLİK SANAYİ VE TİCARET Energy NR X A.Ş. PERA GAYRİMENKUL YATIRIM ORTAKLIĞI A.Ş. Financials NR X PETKİM PETROKİMYA HOLDİNG A.Ş. Materials AQ AQ NP Disclosed Disclosed PETROL OFİSİ A.Ş. Energy NR DP PINAR SÜT MAMULLERİ SANAYİİ A.Ş. Consumer Staples DP X REYSAŞ TAŞIMACILIK VE LOJİSTİK TİCARET A.Ş. Industrials NR X SABANCI HOLDİNG A.Ş. Financials AQ AQ NP Disclosed Disclosed Disclosed ŞEKERBANK T.A.Ş. Financials AQ AQ NP Disclosed Disclosed SELÇUK ECZA DEPOSU TİCARET VE SANAYİ A.Ş. Health Care NR NR SİNPAŞ GAYRİMENKUL YATIRIM ORTAKLIĞI A.Ş. Financials NR DP T.GARANTİ BANKASI A.Ş. Financials AQ AQ Disclosed Disclosed Disclosed T.İŞ BANKASI A.Ş. Financials DP DP T.SINAİ KALKINMA BANKASI A.Ş. Financials AQ AQ Disclosed Disclosed Disclosed T.ŞİŞE VE CAM FABRİKALARI A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary AQ NR NP Disclosed Disclosed TAT KONSERVE SANAYİİ A.Ş. Consumer Staples NR X TAV HAVA LİMANLARI HOLDİNG A.Ş. Industrials AQ AQ Disclosed Disclosed TEKFEN HOLDİNG A.Ş. Industrials NR DP TEKSTİL BANKASI A.Ş. Financials DP X TESCO KİPA Consumer Discretionary AQ(SA) X TOFAŞ TÜRK OTOMOBİL FABRİKASI A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary NR DP TRAKYA CAM SANAYİİ A.Ş. Industrials NR NR TÜPRAŞ-TÜRKİYE PETROL RAFİNERİLERİ A.Ş. Energy NR DP
33 Appendix II: Table of emissions, scores and sector information by company
Company Sector 2011 Response status 2010 Response status Permission Status Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3 TURCAS PETROL A.Ş. Energy DP DP TÜRK EKONOMİ BANKASI A.Ş. Financials AQ AQ Disclosed Disclosed Disclosed TÜRK HAVA YOLLARI A.O. Industrials NR NR TÜRK TELEKOMÜNİKASYON A.Ş. Telecommunication AQ IN Disclosed Disclosed Disclosed Services TURKCELL İLETİŞİM HİZMETLERİ A.Ş. Telecommunication NR DP Services TÜRKİYE HALK BANKASI A.Ş. Financials NR DP TÜRKİYE VAKIFLAR BANKASI T.A.O. Financials NR NR ÜLKER BİSKÜVİ SANAYİ A.Ş. Consumer Staples NR NR VESTEL BEYAZ EŞYA SANAYİ VE TİCARET A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary DP X VESTEL ELEKTRONİK SANAYİ VE TİCARET A.Ş. Consumer Discretionary DP DP YAPI KREDİ SİGORTA A.Ş. Financials NR X YAPI VE KREDİ BANKASI A.Ş. Financials NR DP ZORLU ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş. Energy AQ X Disclosed Disclosed Disclosed AKÇANSA ÇİMENTO SANAYİ VE TİCARET A.Ş. Materials VAQ X Disclosed Disclosed Disclosed BRİSA BRIDGESTONE SABANCI LASTİK SANAYİ VE Materials VAQ X NP Disclosed Disclosed Disclosed TİCARET A.Ş. YÜNSA YÜNLÜ SANAYİ VE TİCARET A.Ş. Materials VAQ VAQ NP Disclosed Disclosed Disclosed
Key to Appendix I
Key:
AQ Answered questionnaire
AQ(SA) Company is a subsidiary, and disclosed through the parent company.
DP Declined to participate
IN Provided information
NP Answered questionnaire but response not made publicly available
NR No response
VAQ Voluntary - answered questionnaire
34 Appendix II: Global Key Trends Summary1
This table outlines some of the key findings from CDP 2011 by geography or industry data-set.2
Sample: geography/number of companies *
4 Global 500 Global Electric Utilities 250 Global Transport 100 Iberia 125 Key Trends Indicators Asia ex-JICK 170* Australia 200 Benelux 150** Brazil 80 Canada 200 Central & Eastern Europe 100 China 100 Emerging Markets 800 Europe 300 FTSE All-World 800 France 250 Germany and Austria 250 % of sample answering CDP 20113 26 50 35 67 54 22 11 36 91 80 35 51 81 39 49 40 Number of companies answering CDP 20113 45 101 52 53 108 22 11 287 272 625 87 128 405 98 49 50 % of responders with Board or other 65 76 79 78 57 33 64 71 85 72 77 63 73 78 69 79 executive level responsibility for climate change % of responders with incentives for the 49 53 60 46 44 25 82 55 70 71 63 38 72 62 69 56
Governance management of climate change issues % of responders with climate change 84 84 89 80 73 50 73 79 92 89 88 69 90 93 88 96 integrated into their business strategy % of responders engaging policymakers 67 75 79 70 63 17 36 67 84 81 76 54 84 91 84 71
Strategy on climate issues to encourage mitigation or adaptation % of responders with emissions reduction 67 46 68 30 34 50 27 55 81 77 69 48 76 62 73 65 targets % of responders with absolute emissions 42 26 40 26 16 25 9 32 42 45 33 28 44 41 33 31 reduction targets % of responders with active emissions 91 89 91 83 88 50 82 83 97 95 95 73 97 87 94 94 reduction initiatives in the reporting year % of responders indicating that their products 63 60 66 59 54 25 45 54 69 70 65 62 70 80 59 79
Targets & Initiatives and services directly help third parties to avoid GHG emissions % of responders seeing regulatory risks 77 82 77 76 67 50 55 77 80 76 81 55 79 94 86 85
% of responders seeing regulatory 77 76 83 83 69 50 55 76 88 79 88 67 81 91 80 88 Risks & opportunities Opportunities % of responders whose absolute emissions 30 28 47 11 29 33 9 31 48 46 35 19 48 23 33 52 (Scope 1 & 2) have decreased compared to last year due to emissions reduction activities % of responders independently verifying any 47 45 70 43 34 33 9 48 74 62 64 40 67 68 61 77 portion of Scope 1 emissions data6 % of responders independently verifying any 51 45 66 41 21 25 0 47 69 58 53 34 61 34 53 73 Emissions Data portion of Scope 2 emissions data6
35 Appendix I: Global Key Trends
Sample: geography/number of companies 5
India 200 Ireland 40 Italy 100* Japan 500 Korea 200 Latin America 50 New Zealand 50 Nordic 260* Russia 50 South Africa 100 Switzerland 100 Turkey 100 UK FTSE 350 US S&P 500 Overall Key Trends Indicators 28 49 34 41 47 58 42 55 8 83 59 17 69 68 N/A % of sample answering CDP 20113 56 19 34 205 94 29 21 143 4 83 59 17 240 340 2057 Number of companies answering CDP 20113 78 68 59 91 62 73 60 65 67 90 69 60 93 49 68 % of responders with Board or other executive level responsibility for climate change 49 47 47 71 55 32 45 46 33 55 37 67 65 63 55 % of responders with incentives for the
management of climate change issues Governance 87 68 81 88 74 73 70 87 33 77 75 73 80 78 79 % of responders with climate change integrated into their business strategy 73 53 66 77 65 68 45 73 33 77 61 47 73 70 68 % of responders engaging policymakers
on climate issues to encourage mitigation Strategy or adaptation 49 47 66 94 57 32 50 67 33 51 58 33 66 65 60 % of responders with emissions reduction targets 7 26 47 69 33 23 35 32 33 26 24 33 32 40 36 % of responders with absolute emissions reduction targets 91 89 91 94 59 86 70 89 67 94 88 73 93 90 87 % of responders with active emissions reduction initiatives in the reporting year 56 32 59 72 53 59 40 73 67 54 61 53 56 60 59 % of responders indicating that their products
and services directly help third parties to Targets & Initiatives avoid GHG emissions 76 68 75 90 70 73 70 77 33 96 58 73 80 63 73 % of responders seeing regulatory risks
87 58 78 82 63 73 50 80 67 91 68 80 77 63 73 % of responders seeing regulatory opportunities Risks & Opportunities 18 32 41 40 40 9 25 39 33 40 31 33 40 38 33 % of responders whose absolute emissions (Scope 1 & 2) have decreased compared to last year due to emissions reduction activities 40 63 72 35 53 59 40 51 33 49 39 33 49 42 45 % of responders independently verifying any portion of Scope 1 emissions data6 42 53 59 37 54 50 40 43 0 50 37 27 46 37 40 % of responders independently verifying any Emissions Data portion of Scope 2 emissions data6
1. The key trends table provides a snapshot of response trends 2. In some cases, the number of companies in a sample may 5. Includes responses across all samples as well as responses based on headline data. That is, responses given to main differ slightly from the named sample size due to takeovers, submitted by companies not included in specific geographic questions without assessment of detailed explanations in mergers, acquisitions and duplicate share listings. or industry samples in 2011. follow up questions. The numbers in this table are based on 3. Includes offline responses to the CDP 2011 questionnaire 6. This takes into account companies reporting that data the online responses submitted to CDP as of 7 September and indirect answers submitted by parent companies. All verification is either complete of underway. 2011. They may therefore differ from numbers in the rest other key trend indicators are based on direct and online of the report which are based on the number of companies company responses only. *Denotes change in number of companies in sample compared to which responded by the applicable local deadline (e.g. 30 4. Asia excluding Japan, India, China and Korea (ex-JICK). previous year. June 2011). Please refer to the CDP website and the local reports for an updated version of this table. **Denotes new sample for 2011.
36 Notes
37 Notes
38 CDP Contacts
Sue Howells Marcus Norton Eva Murray Carbon Disclosure Project Head of Global Operations Head Investor CDP and Partnership Manager 40 Bowling Green Lane CDP Water Disclosure Global Operations London EC1R 0NE Daniel Turner United Kingdom Head of Disclosure Frances Way Tel: +44 (0)20 7970 5660 Program Director Fax: +44 (0)20 7691 7316 www.cdproject.net [email protected]
Sabanci University Contacts
Melsa Ararat, PhD Mirhan Köroglu, MSc Director, CDP Turkey Project Manager, CDP Turkey [email protected] [email protected]
Report Writer Contacts
Melsa Ararat, PhD Esra Süel , MSc Zeynep Okuyan (CDP Turkey) (Imperial College, PhD Candidate) (E&Y Turkey)
Mirhan Köroglu, MSc Serim Kumralbaş (CDP Turkey) (E&Y Turkey)
Emre Çelik (E&Y Turkey)
Pelin Altındal (E&Y Turkey)
Report Reviewer* Contacts Doç. Dr. Yıldız Arıkan
Doç. Dr. Gürkan Kumbaroğlu
Prof. Dr. Fikret Adaman
* for Key Trends in Turkey section only.
Important Notice The contents of this report may be used by anyone providing acknowledgement is given to Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP). This does not represent a license to repackage or resell any of the data reported to CDP and presented in this report. If you intend to do this, you need to obtain express permission from CDP before doing so.
E&Y Turkey and CDP prepared the data and analysis in this report based on responses to the 2011 CDP information request. [Report Writer/Partner] and CDP do not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this information. [Report Writer/Partner] and CDP make no representation or warranty, express or implied, and accept no liability concerning the fairness, accuracy, or completeness of the information and opinions contained hereinor for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this publication or for any decision based on it. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. All information and views expressed herein by CDP and [Report Writer/Partner] are based on their judgement at the time of this report and are subject to change without notice due to economic, political, industry and firm specific factors. Guest commentaries where included in this report reflect the views of their respective authors; their inclusion is not an endorsement of them.
E&Y Turkey and CDP and their affiliated member firms or companies, or their respective shareholders, members, partners, principles, directors, officers and/or employees, may have a position in the securities of the companies discussed herein. The securities of the companies mentioned in this document may not be eligible for sale in some states or countries, nor suitable for all types of investors; their value and the income they produce may fluctuate and/or be adversely affected by exchange rates.
‘Carbon Disclosure Project’ and ‘CDP’ refers to Carbon Disclosure Project, a United Kingdom company limited by guarantee, registered as a United Kingdom charity number 1122330.
© 2011 Carbon Disclosure Project. All rights reserved.