Overview
When navigating your list of suppliers, you might have noticed that some already have a score. This score can come from various sources: either the supplier has already been contacted by another of our clients, or it has been given a score based on available public data. This article explains how scores are derived from public data, how missing information is handled, and how we guard against greenwashing.
1. What public data is used?
Public data includes, but is not limited to: CSR reports, SBTi, CDP and ADEME databases, public scoring systems (Ecovadis, B Corp, etc.) and declarations. These elements contain a lot of different information that allows us to answer part of the questions of the supplier questionnaire.
2. How suppliers are scored based on public data
We follow a step-wise process:
We gather all available information on the supplier. This includes systematically searching known GHG disclosure databases, reviewing the latest CSR reports available on company websites or referenced in CSR disclosure databases, reviewing their scoring on different environmental performance scoring systems, and reading other company sustainability claims.
We map all available information to our questionnaire fields. In case of partial information, we leave the information out of our scoring system. For instance, if the supplier has a supplier engagement initiative but is not transparent about the share of emissions represented by suppliers engaged in the program, we leave this information blank in the questionnaire.
We compute the scoring just as we would for a supplier that answered the questionnaire.
3. Handling missing information
Some of the suppliers scored in this way have been scored automatically, without waiting for a client request. For these suppliers, we might miss part of the available public data. Additionally, sustainability-related data is often only partly public and disclosed only upon request. This is especially the case for emission reduction strategies, which are rarely detailed in CSR reports. That's why, in most cases, suppliers scored on public data have no points in the action plan section.
You can get an estimate of the share of available information by looking at the completion rate associated with each score.
To improve this completion rate, you can ask the suppliers scored based on public data to complete the remaining questions and provide further information by sending them the questionnaire.
4. What if a supplier uses greenwashing to hide poor environmental results?
Our score is designed to avoid putting forward companies that use greenwashing. A few characteristics help us achieve this:
Only a minor share of points is attributed to shallow reporting or commitments. Science shows that companies reporting the most and committing to the most ambitious climate pledges often do so to distract from important environmental impacts. Most points can be gained by proving that thorough reporting has been made and by showing that significant actions have been put in place to reduce the company's environmental footprint. Companies that rely only on communication and do not have a long-term, science-based plan to alleviate their impact can get a C grade at most.
We can detect inconsistent data. We have a few methods to do so:
Each public entry is reviewed by one of our experts to make sure the presented data is solid (applied methodological framework, perimeter, transparency, etc.) and consistent with sectoral objectives. For instance, we won't give points to investment funds that do not account for financed emissions in their Scope 3.
We automatically verify the emissions values provided to make sure they are consistent with sectoral averages. Inconsistent data is flagged and removed if no logical explanation can be found for the difference.
Our score is conservative. As mentioned above, in case of partial, missing, or unclear data, we leave it out altogether. Companies that voluntarily keep their reporting blurry to hide their lack of commitment will therefore be sanctioned by this system.