EPRS Study: Corporate Due Diligence and Corporate Accountability

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

EPRS Study: Corporate Due Diligence and Corporate Accountability Corporate due diligence and corporate accountability European added value assessment STUDY EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Author: Cecilia Navarra European Added Value Unit PE 654.191 – October 2020 EN Corporate due diligence and corporate accountability European added value assessment There is evidence of human rights violations and negative environmental impacts related to business activities, including of EU companies. Several actions have been taken at both international and EU level to promote responsible business conduct and to prevent such violations. While being important steps forward, these initiatives suffer from several limitations, as they are either voluntary, sector-specific, or limited to reporting obligations. The EU is committed to upholding human rights and environmental protection, and has the competence to harmonise national company law to ensure the proper functioning of the single market. This study analyses the European added value of a potential measure requiring companies to carry out due diligence on possible social and environmental risks in their operations and supply chains. It analyses why action should be taken at the EU level and points to its potential impacts from the perspective of both EU companies and society at large. EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service AUTHORS Cecilia Navarra, European Added Value Unit, DG EPRS. This paper has been drawn up by the European Added Value Unit of the Directorate for Impact Assessment and European Added Value, within the Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services (EPRS) of the Secretariat of the European Parliament. The annexed company-level analysis of the estimated economic impact of environmental, social and governance due diligence and corporate accountability for EU companies has been written by Stefania Camoletto, Maria Jose Montes-Sancho and Erica Santini at the request of the European Added Value Unit (EPRS). To contact the authors, please email: [email protected] ADMINISTRATORS RESPONSIBLE Cecilia Navarra, European Added Value Unit, DG EPRS To contact the publisher, please email: [email protected] LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN Manuscript completed in October 2020. DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT This document is prepared for, and addressed to, the Members and staff of the European Parliament as background material to assist them in their parliamentary work. The content of the document is the sole responsibility of its author(s) and any opinions expressed herein should not be taken to represent an official position of the Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the European Parliament is given prior notice and sent a copy. Brussels © European Union, 2020. PE 654.191 ISBN: 978-92-846-7182-3 DOI: 10.2861/594198 CAT: QA-02-20-823-EN-N [email protected] http://www.eprs.ep.parl.union.eu (intranet) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank (internet) http://epthinktank.eu (blog) Corporate due diligence and corporate accountability Executive summary European added value assessments (EAVAs) provide support in the form of research-based evidence to European Parliament reports on legislative-initiative proposals drafted under Article 225 TFEU. This EAVA accompanies the legislative-initiative report of the European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) on Corporate due diligence and corporate accountability (2020/2129(INL)). EAVAs try to explore the potential impact of an EU action in a certain field, by analysing the gaps existing in the status quo and identifying the potential European added value of the proposed intervention. One of the points of departure in the debate around the need for companies to apply due diligence with respect to human rights violations and negative environmental impacts is the increased business internationalisation and integration in global value chains. Companies’ activities can have social and environmental impacts in the regions where they themselves or other actors in their value chain operate, which are sometimes far from the country in which the company is registered. There is evidence of violations of fundamental rights related to business activity; as an example, in 2017, the International Labour Organization (ILO) reported 24.9 million people were victims of forced labour, of whom 16 million were in the private economy, in sectors such as manufacturing, construction, agriculture and domestic work. Research also shows adverse environmental impacts: 62 % of tropical forest loss is due to agricultural exploitation for commodity production, and 24 % is due to illegal agro-conversion for export markets. In the light of these negative impacts, some major initiatives at the international level, such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, have been taken to promote responsible business conduct and to prevent businesses' violations of human rights. These initiatives are important steps towards addressing negative impacts related to business activities, and they recommend the adoption of due diligence as a way to implement responsible business conduct. They are nevertheless voluntary measures and their uptake by companies appears limited. The UN working group on business and human rights itself points to the low prevalence of practices that reflect the UN Guiding Principles. There is a growing consensus that the approaches applied, which are largely voluntary, suffer from limitations. The EU is committed to protecting human rights and the environment, and has assumed a number of international obligations in this respect. At the EU level, a number of initiatives –such as the Non-Financial Reporting Directive, the Timber Regulation and the Conflict Minerals Regulation – have been put in place to address the negative impacts of business activities. Still, these important steps remain focused on specific sectors, or are limited to reporting requirements. There is evidence of a limited uptake of due diligence practices among EU businesses. A 2020 study commissioned by the European Commission's Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers (DG JUST) finds that just a little over a third of business respondents indicated that their companies undertake due diligence accounting for a broad range of impacts on human rights and the environment. Relatedly, there appear to be gaps in the effective access to remedy for victims, which is a right enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Most research and business surveys underline the reduced legal certainty as regards the duties of companies due to the absence of a common legal approach at the EU level. Against this background, the need for a level playing field is mounting, since companies that are more proactive in social and environmental fields risk being exposed to a number of disadvantages. I EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service This EAVA focuses on a potential measure that requires companies to carry out due diligence to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for actual or potential human rights violations and negative environmental impacts in their operations and supply chain. This is assessed against the current situation, where some but not all EU Member States have adopted laws in this regard, and where international voluntary guidelines already exist. Overall, the European added value of such a potential measure appears significant, even if it is not possible to quantify each and every one of its components. The present study suggests that potential mandatory measures would increase compliance with standards such as the OECD Guidelines and the UN Guiding Principles. According to the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, effective due diligence practices can also help to strengthen victims' access to remedy. The impact can be substantial, depending on the quality of enforcement and on how the legal aspects are designed. Action at the EU level would allow to harmonise the rules within the single market and thereby ensure its good functioning and the creation of a level playing field favouring fair competition. Legal certainty is expected to increase substantially, since EU-level due diligence requirements could address the concern raised by many businesses on the lack of clarity regarding their duties. A specially designed law-based standard would support current good practices and give companies greater leverage over their suppliers. From a company perspective, mandatory due diligence involves implementation costs and has an impact on economic performance. According to the literature, these costs, while significant in some cases, are expected to be moderate as compared to company revenues. They will nevertheless be contingent on the type of company and especially its size. The impact of environmental, social and governance accountability practices on company outcomes is usually considered positive in most literature thanks to: reduced risks, improved stakeholder relationships, lower costs resulting from conflicts, improved transparency and knowledge of the value chain, increased reputation and greater incentives to innovate. The present study confirms these findings. Analysing a sample of EU companies, it indeed finds a positive correlation between the extent to which companies implement environmental and social policies and their economic performance (with a focus on profitability). Interestingly, this correlation is stronger
Recommended publications
  • Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Sustainability: HR’S Leadership Role SHRM-Morris County Chapter – Brian J
    Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Sustainability: HR’s Leadership Role SHRM-Morris County Chapter – Brian J. Glade, SPHR, GPHR – February 11, 2009 ©SHRM 2009 CSR and Business Sustainability: Defining the Terms CSR • Used since the 1970s to denote ethical and socially responsible business behavior Sustainability/Business Sustainability • Dates back to 1987 World Commission on Environment and Development • Combines traditional CSR concept with longer-term renewable approach to business practices CSR-Business Sustainability • Today, the two terms are used interchangeably and are defined by World Council for Sustainable Business as: “Contributing to sustainable development by working to improve the quality of life for employees, their families, the local community and stakeholders up and down the supply chain” ©SHRM 2009 2 CSR and Business Sustainability: HR’s Leadership Role Today’s Agenda • Evolution of CSR/Business Sustainability • Triple Bottom Line • SHRM’s 2007 CSR Pilot Study • HR’s Leadership Role in CSR/Business Sustainability • Barack Obama: our “Green” President ©SHRM 2009 3 CSR/Sustainability Evolution: Early Pioneers Founded in 1978 with a social purpose Shares rewards with its employees and the community Sources ingredients from socially conscious suppliers. In 1992, first U.S. public company to sign onto the CERES Principles to protect the environment. ©SHRM 2009 4 CSR/Sustainability Evolution: Early Pioneers UK cosmetics company founded in 1976 with a commitment to sell products not tested on animals. Company went on to support environmental causes, HIV/AIDS awareness, human and animal rights, and campaigns against domestic violence. In the early 1990s, sponsored employee trips to work in orphanages in Romania, raising international awareness of the poor conditions of the facilities and the children’s health.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Us Policymaker Esg Primer
    2020 U.S. POLICYMAKER ESG PRIMER DECEMBER 2020 About Paul, Weiss’s sustainability and ESG advisory practice Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP is a firm of 1,000 lawyers who provide innovative and effective solutions to our clients’ most complex legal and business challenges. Our sustainability and environmental, social and governance (ESG) advisory practice helps boards and executives navigate the legal, business and political ramifications of developing and implementing sustainability and other ESG initiatives. We advise on ESG-focused stakeholder engagement, corporate governance, crisis management, corporate social responsibility, sustainability, diversity and inclusion, ethics and compliance. For more information visit paulweiss.com/practices/sustainability-esg. This Primer is not intended to provide legal advice, and no legal or business decision should be based on its content. About Refinitiv Refinitiv is one of the world’s largest providers of financial markets data and infrastructure, serving over 40,000 institutions in approximately 190 countries. It provides leading data and insights, trading platforms, and open data and technology platforms that connect a thriving global financial markets community – driving performance in trading, investment, wealth management, regulatory compliance, market data management, enterprise risk and fighting financial crime. Report authors Barnabas Acs, Ph.D., Global Business Development Director, Sustainable Finance, Refinitiv Mark S. Bergman, Partner, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison
    [Show full text]
  • HSBC Asset Management – UK Stewardship Code Report 2020 1
    HSBC Asset Management UK Stewardship Code Report 2020 Foreword We welcome the UK Stewardship Code 2020, which we have applied during the course of 2020. We were early signatories to the first Stewardship Code and recognised the ISC Statement of Principles which preceded it. Our stewardship is an important expression of our fiduciary responsibility to our clients. We believe that deep consideration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues and commitment to active stewardship is integral to sound investment decisions that will deliver sustainable returns to our clients. I hope that this statement will give clients and other stakeholders a good understanding of how we have applied the Code. The COVID-19 pandemic meant that 2020 was an extraordinary year. The impact of the pandemic was the focus for much engagement but did not divert investors and companies from significant progress in addressing other systemic risks such as climate change. As we emerge from the Covid-19 crisis, we support the call to build back a better, more inclusive and sustainable world. There is much to be done to achieve these goals, and we are committed to playing our part. We will continue our active stewardship, incorporating ESG factors in our investment process and creating long term value for our clients, supporting the transition to a more sustainable economy and society. Joanna Munro, Chief Investment Officer HSBC Asset Management – UK Stewardship Code Report 2020 1 |PUBLIC| PURPOSE & GOVERNANCE Principle 1 Signatories’ purpose, investment beliefs, strategy, and culture enable stewardship that creates long-term value for clients and beneficiaries leading to sustainable benefits for the economy, the environment and society.
    [Show full text]
  • Illustration: Kah Yangni Design: Cary Design Group
    Illustration: Kah Yangni Design: Cary Design Group Dear friend, What a year it’s been. I hope this report finds you thriving, growing, and staying well. As I spoke with members like you over this turbulent year, I was struck by how different all our circumstances and experiences have been—and yet how most of us were grappling with similar, big emotions: grief, rage, and hope. Sometimes all three emotions in a single day, or even a single hour. Which, to me, is a clear sign of our shared humanity. I’ve also been struck by how many members like you, as well as our staff, board, and allies, have approached this season of change in visionary ways. Both the COVID-19 pandemic and the uprising for Black liberation have made it clear that all of us who hope and work for a better world must recognize the ways in which all of our struggles and issues are connected. This moment requires us to truly understand and challenge the roots of the economic and social systems we live within: anti-Blackness and systemic racism, which are inseparable from brutal, extractive capitalism. And it requires action and solutions that are larger and more encompassing than any single organization and any single issue. Corporate Accountability has always seen our work of stopping life-threatening abuses by corporations as integral to creating the systemic change we need. But we are called in this moment to be more explicit about how this work is specifically connected to ending systemic racism. For example, our campaigning to make Big Polluters pay is not just about taking fossil fuel corporations to court.
    [Show full text]
  • Reprisk the Leading Research Tool to Help You Flag, Assess, and Monitor ESG Risks in Your Business
    An introduction to RepRisk The leading research tool to help you flag, assess, and monitor ESG risks in your business RepRisk AG Zurich, Switzerland February 2018 RepRisk AG, Zurich, Switzerland | www.reprisk.com | RepRisk® is a registered trademark. RepRisk delivers leading research solutions to mitigate ESG and business conduct risks § RepRisk is a pioneer in ESG and business conduct risk research and business intelligence § 1998: Founded as a risk consultancy serving the financial sector § 2006: Launch of the RepRisk Platform as a due diligence solution to help firms identify, assess, and monitor risks and violations of international standards in their business § Today: Runs the world’s most comprehensive database on ESG risks, serving 200+ clients globally – and the only provider to cover private companies and projects in developed, emerging and frontier markets. § Headquarters in Zurich, with offices in Berlin, Manila, and Toronto 2 RepRisk serves clients worldwide – helping them prevent and mitigate ESG risks in their business PRIVILEGED 3 Our framework: ESG risks can materially impact a firm’s social license to operate and its bottom line Business conduct risks Environmental Social Governance Pollution, waste, Human rights abuses, Corruption, bribery, climate change labor, discrimination tax evasion, fraud Compliance risks Reputational risks Financial risks PRIVILEGED 4 Our research approach: It’s not enough to look at policies – you must look at performance There are two sources of information used to assess a company: RepRisk: Outside-in perspective Other providers: Inside-out focus § Focuses on performance § Focuses on intention § Based on media, stakeholders, § Based on a company’s own self- and public sources reporting, such as: external to a company § Sustainability or CSR Reports § Provides a timely and § effective “reality check” Company website about what is happening on-the- § Company Code of Conduct ground, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Most Environmentally and Socially Controversial Companies of 2010 Zurich, December 15, 2010 / Karen Reiner
    Most Environmentally and Socially Controversial Companies of 2010 Zurich, December 15, 2010 / Karen Reiner According to the reputational risk radar RepRisk, the top ten most environmentally and socially controversial multinational companies in 2010 were: 1. Transocean Ltd 6. Chevron Corp 2. BP PLC 7. BG Group PLC 3. Vedanta Resources PLC 8. Royal Dutch Shell 4. ExxonMobil Corp 9. Sinar Mas Group 5. Foxconn Electronics Inc 10. Magyar Aluminium (MAL) Companies on the list have been severely criticized by the world’s media, governmental organizations and NGOs for issues including human rights abuses, severe environmental violations, impacts on local communities, corruption and bribery, as well as breaches of labor, and health and safety standards. Rankings are based on the Reputational Risk Index (RRI), as measured by RepRisk throughout 2010. The RRI is directly derived from the negative pr ess captured by RepRisk and its calculation is strictly rule-based. RepRisk does not measure a firm's overall reputation. Instead, by capturing criticism, RepRisk computes a firm's exposure to controversy and therefore provides an indicator for reputational risk. RepRisk is used by asset owners and asset managers, commercial and investment bankers, supply chain managers, and corporate responsibility experts. The Reputational Risk Index (RRI) ranges from zero (lowest) to 100 (highest) and its calculation is based on the reach of news sources, the frequency and timing of news, as well as its content, i.e. severity and novelty of the issues addressed. The RRI is an indicator of a company's exposure to controversial issues and allows an initial assessment of risks that are attached to investments and business relationships.
    [Show full text]
  • From Corporate Responsibility to Corporate Accountability
    Hastings Business Law Journal Volume 16 Number 1 Winter 2020 Article 3 Winter 2020 From Corporate Responsibility to Corporate Accountability Min Yan Daoning Zhang Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_business_law_journal Part of the Business Organizations Law Commons Recommended Citation Min Yan and Daoning Zhang, From Corporate Responsibility to Corporate Accountability, 16 Hastings Bus. L.J. 43 (2020). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_business_law_journal/vol16/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Business Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 2 - YAN _ZHANG - V9 - KC - 10.27.19.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 11/15/2019 11:11 AM From Corporate Responsibility to Corporate Accountability Min Yan* and Daoning Zhang** I. INTRODUCTION The concept of corporate responsibility or corporate social responsibility (“CSR”) keeps evolving since it appeared. The emphasis was first placed on business people’s social conscience rather than on the company itself, which was well reflected by Howard Bowen’s landmark book, Social Responsibilities of the Businessman.1 Then CSR was defined as responsibilities to society, which extends beyond economic and legal obligations by corporations.2 Since then, corporate responsibility is thought to begin where the law ends. 3 In other words, the concept of social responsibility largely excludes legal obedience from the concept of social responsibility. An analysis of 37 of the most used definitions of CSR also shows “voluntary” as one of the most common dimensions.4 Put differently, corporate responsibility reflects the belief that corporations have duties beyond generating profits for their shareholders.
    [Show full text]
  • Institutions, Organizations and Individuals Advocating for Corporate Accountability Condemn Chevron's Retaliatory Attacks on H
    Institutions, Organizations and Individuals Advocating for Corporate Accountability Condemn Chevron’s Retaliatory Attacks on Human Rights and Corporate Accountability Advocates and See it as a Serious Threat to Open Society and Due Process of Law January 23, 2014 - We, the undersigned organizations and individuals, condemn the actions by Chevron in its efforts to silence critics and ignore a $9.5 billion judgment against it for environmental damage in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Chevron’s actions set a dangerous precedent and represent a growing and serious threat to the ability of civil society to hold corporations accountable for their misdeeds around the world. Since Chevron launched its attack on those who have been working for decades to pressure the company to clean up the environmental damage caused by its operations in the Ecuadorian Amazon, independent journalists have been forced to turn over their material and nonprofit watchdog groups have faced massive legal actions designed to cripple their ability to work and undermine their ability to grow support for their efforts. Attacks Free Speech In a move opposed by The New York Times, ABC, CBS, NBC, Dow Jones, the Associated Press, the Hearst Newspapers, the Daily News, and the Gannett Company, Chevron used its legal might to launch a major threat to independent journalism when it won a decision to force documentary producer and director Joe Berlinger to turn over to Chevron more than 600 hours of raw footage. Chevron has also targeted nonprofit environmental and indigenous rights groups and individual activists with subpoenas designed to cripple their effectiveness and chill their speech.
    [Show full text]
  • Reprisk Special Report Deep Sea Extractive Activities: Seabed Mining and Deep Sea Drilling
    ESG Business Intelligence RepRisk Special Report Deep Sea Extractive Activities: Seabed Mining and Deep Sea Drilling June 2015 Foreword from the CEO I am pleased to announce the release of our Deep Sea Extractive Activities Report, which focuses on the challenges facing Seabed Mining and Deep Sea Drilling. The scientific community is slowly recognizing that the deep-sea marine environment harbors complex and diverse ecosystems that can potentially benefit mankind. Pharmaceutical companies also believe that the deep-sea may provide resources for the discovery of new medicines derived from natural products. Exploration of the deep-sea marine environment is in its infancy, and many discoveries undoubtedly remain to be made. Commercial overfishing and pollution have already harmed the world’s oceans, and the interest to exploit mineral and oil deposits in deep-sea locations has raised concerns that these fragile marine ecosystems will be irrevocably damaged before scientists have had time to explore their full potential. Scientists and civil society organizations are urging companies to consider the cumulative impacts of their extraction in their risk management strategies, and are calling for an international consensus on the protection of the marine environment. We hope that this report sheds some light on the scale of the challenges facing companies that want to explore the commercial potential of deep-sea environments and will increase awareness of the ESG risks involved in such activities. Philipp Aeby CEO, RepRisk AG About RepRisk RepRisk is a leading business intelligence provider specializing in dynamic environmental, social and governance (ESG) risk analytics and metrics. On a daily basis, RepRisk systematically screens big data from a broad range of open intelligence sources in 15 languages in order to identify, filter, analyze and quantify ESG risks (such as environmental degradation, human rights abuses and corruption) related to companies, projects, sectors and countries.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Corporate Accountability?
    WHAT IS CORPORATE ACCOUNTABILITY? BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW Since the 1990s, the world has witnessed the growing importance and visibility of a range of initiatives led by businesses, social organisations and governments, with the stated aim of pressuring companies to behave in more socially responsible and accountable ways. This is a new development for many parts of the business world. Previously, the state (or government) was assumed to lead standard setting and behavioural norms for businesses in relation to most categories of stakeholders. When community organisations and interest groups wanted to change business behaviour, they focussed on changing the law. From the 1990s the focus changed, reflected in the emergence of new alliances and regimes of influence over business norms, linking together consumers, communities, workers and producers. What is the difference between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate accountability? Corporate responsibility, corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate accountability are sometimes confused or seen to be synonymous. However, corporate responsibility and corporate accountability are typically distinguished from one another along several lines. Corporate responsibility in its broadest sense refers to varied practices that reflect the belief that corporations have responsibilities beyond generating profit for their shareholders. Such responsibilities include the negative duty to refrain from harm caused to the environment, individuals or communities, and sometimes also positive duties to protect society and the environment, for example protecting human rights of workers and communities affected by business activities. Such responsibilities are generally considered to extend not only to direct social and environmental impacts of business activity, but also to more indirect effects resulting from relationships with business partners, such as those involved in global production chains.
    [Show full text]
  • Paradigm Shift in Financial Markets the Economic and Legal Impacts of the EU Action Plan Sustainable Finance on the Swiss Financial Sector
    www.pwc.ch Paradigm shift in financial markets The economic and legal impacts of the EU Action Plan Sustainable Finance on the Swiss financial sector March 2019 Europe’s financial sector must lead the green transition and make our Union the global destination for sustainable investment. There is no greater return on investment than a healthy planet and economy. Jean-Claude Juncker (22.03.2018) at High-Level Conference on sustainable finance Foreword “Finance will be green, or it won’t exist in the future”. The Ultimately, the financial sector must develop practices French Minister of Finance, Bruno Le Maire, made it clear. to incentivise institutions and their employees to account The transition to a more sustainable economy is a done for and integrate sustainability factors by default. deal internationally, and is gaining speed. The Sustainable By putting in place the Action Plan Sustainable Finance, Development Goals (SDGs) are being implemented by the the EU has created the necessary framework conditions signatory countries, and the Paris Agreement on Climate for this to happen. The anticipated impact will be signifi- Change (Paris Agreement) was ratified in record time. cantly stronger than was experienced under MiFID II, Finance needs to adapt, and has an economic self-interest GDPR or AEoI. in doing so. Just as visionary Alfred Escher founded the Schweizerische There are still those who continue to ignore reality and Kreditanstalt to finance the forward-looking Gotthard railway defend the self-interests of the old fossil world. However, project − a cornerstone of Switzerland’s economic success − upon closer inspection even Donald Trump’s rejection of today, too, we need long-term investment in the sustainable the Paris climate agreement had a limited impact in the face transition and the infrastructure required to achieve it.
    [Show full text]
  • CDP Climate Change Report 2015 United Kingdom Edition
    CDP Climate Change Report 2015 United Kingdom Edition Written on behalf of 822 investors with US$95 trillion in assets CDP Report | October 2015 1 Contents Foreword 3 Global overview 4 2015 Leadership criteria 8 The Climate A List 2015 10 2015 FTSE 350 Climate Disclosure Leadership Index (CDLI) 12 Investor engagement in the UK 13 Profile: BT Group 14 United Kingdom snapshot 16 Profile: SSE 18 Natural Capital 20 Appendix I 24 Investor signatories and members Appendix II 25 FTSE 350 scores Appendix III 30 Responding FTSE SmallCap climate change companies Please note: The selection of analyzed companies in this report is based on market capitalization of regional stock indices whose constituents change over time. Therefore the analyzed companies are not the same in 2010 and 2015 and any trends shown are indicative of the progress of the largest companies in that region as defined by market capitalization. Large emitters may be present in one year and not the other if they dropped out of or entered a stock index. ‘Like for like’ analysis on emissions for sub-set of companies that reported in both 2010 and 2015 is included for clarity. Some dual listed companies are present in more than one regional stock index. Companies referring to a parent company response, those responding after the deadline and self-selected voluntary responding companies are not included in the analysis. For more information about the companies requested to respond to CDP’s climate change program in 2015 please visit: https://www.cdp.net/Documents/disclosure/2015/Companies-requested-to-respond-CDP-climate-change.pdf Important Notice The contents of this report may be used by anyone providing acknowledgement is given to CDP Worldwide (CDP).
    [Show full text]