PC
Uploaded byPurandar Chakravarty
501 views

A-LIST Global Climate Leaders - CDP 2014 report

The Climate Performance Leadership Index (CPLI) for 2014 recognizes 161 companies as climate change performance leaders. The companies span 12 sectors and come from 26 countries. Many companies have been included on the CPLI for multiple years, demonstrating ongoing leadership in addressing climate change through public disclosure and management of climate-related issues. The index is based on data submitted by companies to CDP, providing information to 767 institutional investors representing over $92 trillion in assets.

Embed presentation

Download to read offline
Report sponsor The A List The CDP Climate Performance Leadership Index 2014 On behalf of 767 investors with assets of US$92 trillion
Aplicación sobre fondo blanco Aplicación en B/N Aplicación sobre color Aplicación en Merchandising sustainabl e Spain, Portugal and Latin America JapanJapan CDP’s global scoring and sustainability business process outsourcing (BPO) partner Australia & New Zealand, Benelux, Canada, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Nordic, SE Asia, United Kingdom, USA Germany and Austria Germany and Austria Germany and Austria Germany: Mittelstand Switzerland Japan Italy South Africa South Africa South Korea China, Japan, Russia, Turkey Brazil France ※PANTONE：コート紙を使用する場合にはPANTONE COATEDチップ、非コート紙の場合 にはPANTONE UNCOATEDチップを基準としてください。 Deloitte Blue 280 375基準色　 PANTONE DIC 近似色 Deloitte Green CMYK C100 M75 Y0 K13 C45 M0 Y93 K0 RGB R0 G39 B118 R146 G212 B0 255 F294 CDP 2014 scoring partners CDP works with a number of partners to deliver the scores for all our responding companies. These partners are listed below along with the geographical regions in which they provide the scoring. All scoring partners have to complete a detailed training course to ensure the methodology and guidance are applied correctly and the scoring results go through a comprehensive quality assurance process before being published. In some regions there is more than one scoring partner and the responsibilities are shared between multiple partners. PE International ACCIONA BT Group Our sincere thanks are also extended to the following for their generous support: CVS Health Daimler AG Elekta Konica Minolta, Inc Johnson Matthey Siemens Aktiengesellschaft
03 Contents 04 CEO foreword 05 Sustainability data makes business stronger Guest commentary: PE International 06 Climate Performance Leadership Index (CPLI) 08 What makes a climate change performance global leader? Executive summary 11 Leadership criteria 12 Where are the performance leaders? 14 Investor analysis: Climate change action and financial performance Important Notice The contents of this report may be used by anyone providing acknowledgement is given to CDP. This does not represent a license to repackage or resell any of the data reported to CDP or the contributing authors and presented in this report. If you intend to repackage or resell any of the contents of this report, you need to obtain express permission from CDP before doing so. CDP has prepared the data and analysis in this report based on responses to the 2014 climate change information request. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given by CDP or any of its contributors as to the accuracy or completeness of the information and opinions contained in this report. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. To the extent permitted by law, CDP and its contributors do not accept or assume any liability, responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this report or for any decision based on it. All information and views expressed herein by CDP and its contributors are based on their judgment 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. CDP and its contributors, their affiliated member firms or companies, or their respective shareholders, members, partners, principals, 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. ‘CDP’ refers to CDP Worldwide, a United Kingdom company limited by guarantee, registered as a United Kingdom charity number 1122330. © 2014 CDP Worldwide. All rights reserved. Measurement of emissions used throughout the report: 1 gigaton (Gt) CO ² e = 1,000,000,000 metric tons CO ² e 1 megaton (Mt) CO ² e = 1,000,000 metric tons CO ² e Cover photo: Shawn Pecor / Shutterstock.com Sector profiles 16 Consumer discretionary 18 Consumer staples 20 Energy 22 Financials 24 Health care 26 Industrials 28 Information technology 30 Materials 32 Telecommunication services 34 Utilities 36 Building on climate change leadership: Natural capital 37 Appendix I Investor members 38 Appendix II Largest non-responders by market capitalization 40 Appendix III Investor signatories
04 CEO foreword The global economy has bounced back from crisis and a cautious optimism is beginning to pervade the markets. As we embrace recovery we must remember that greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise and we face steep financial risk if we do not mitigate them. The unprecedented environmental challenges that we confront today – reducing greenhouse gas emissions, safeguarding water resources and preventing the destruction of forests – are also economic problems. One irrefutable fact is filtering through to companies and investors: the bottom line is at risk from environmental crisis. The impact of climate events on economies around the world has increasingly been splashed across headlines in the last year, with the worst winter in 30 years suffered by the USA costing billions of dollars. Australia has experienced its hottest two years on record and the UK has had its wettest winter for hundreds of years costing the insurance industry over a billion pounds. Over three quarters of companies reporting to CDP this year have disclosed a physical risk from climate change. Investing in climate change–related resilience planning has become crucial for all corporations. Investor engagement on these issues is increasing. In the US a record number of shareholder resolutions in the 2014 proxy season led 20 international corporations to commit to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or sustainably source palm oil. As mainstream investors begin to recognize the real value at risk, we are seeing more action from some of the 767 investors who request disclosure through CDP. The Norwegian pension fund, Norges Bank, with assets worth over $800 billion, expects companies to show strategies for climate change risk mitigation and water management, and have divested from both timber and palm oil companies that did not meet their standards. There is growing momentum on the policy front with President Obama’s announcement of new federal rules to limit greenhouse gases in the US. In the EU, some 6,000 companies will be required to disclose on specific environmental, social and governance criteria as part of their mainstream reporting to investors. In China over 20,000 companies will be required to report their greenhouse gas emissions to the government. There is a palpable sea change in approach by companies driven by a growing recognition that there is a cost associated with the carbon they emit. Measurement, transparency and accountability drives positive change in the world of business and investment. Our experience working with over 4,500 companies shows the multitude of benefits for companies that report their environmental impacts, unveiling risks and previously unseen opportunities. We are standing at a juncture in history. With the prospect of a global climate deal coming from the United Nations process, governments, cities, the private sector and civil society have a great opportunity to take bold actions and build momentum in the run up to the Paris 2015 meeting. The decisions we make today can lead us to a profitable and secure future. A future that we can all be proud of. Paul Simpson Chief Executive Officer, CDP One irrefutable fact is filtering through to companies and investors: the bottom line is at risk from environmental crisis. 1.  www.un.org/ climatechange/towards-a- climate-agreement/
05 Sustainability data makes business stronger Humanity is living beyond the planet’s ability to support us. We have to decouple economic growth from our use of resources and the first step to doing that is to know and monitor the impact of our activities. Thanks to the efforts of CDP, the amount and quality of data available to businesses has exploded. We now live in the age of “big data” and businesses have the ability to decode quickly and effectively the impact of the way they operate. This is a boon to companies and their stakeholders as they become increasingly concerned about issues ranging from greenhouse gas emissions and resource scarcity to labor conditions and conflict minerals – and their potential effects on business performance. Businesses, cities, government departments and municipalities need to know, now more than ever, what is going on within their own operations and throughout their value chains. However, there is a big difference between having the information available and being able to make good use of it. Trying to gather and use this data armed with little more than a clipboard and a spreadsheet is no longer feasible if organizations want to manage their sustainability reporting and extract the maximum value from it. They need system-wide software platforms that enable them to evaluate everything from a product carbon footprint to an enterprise-level sustainability strategy or supply chain program. And information, once collected, should not be trapped in the silos of different departments but should be used again and again to meet requests for greater transparency from stakeholders ranging from organisations such as CDP to investors, customers, employees and regulators. However, disclosure on its own is not enough. Sustainability leaders are using the wealth of data they now have available to define targets, identify opportunities, benchmark their performance, monitor and measure cost savings and communicate their progress. The integration of sustainability performance management into their operations enables businesses not just to map their sustainability landscape but also to navigate their way through it and scale up their efforts. Armed with the knowledge of the full impacts of their value chains and products, they can improve them or make entirely new products with sustainability designed into them. They can create innovative technologies and sell into new markets. And crucially, they can do this not just on an ad-hoc or one-off basis but they can scale up their sustainability performance throughout their organizations to create an ongoing competitive advantage. True leaders in the field are using their sustainability information to become stronger businesses and to make better decisions based on what they have learned. They understand that analyzing, reporting and benchmarking the data they have gathered can help to boost revenues, strengthen brands, cut costs and manage risks. We congratulate the companies recognised for their leadership in this report and are pleased to continue to accompany many of them on their journey. Christoph Wilfert CEO, PE International True leaders in the field are using their sustainability information to become stronger businesses and to make better decisions.
06 2014 Climate Performance Leadership Index (CPLI) Years Company Country on CPLI Consumer discretionary ARÇELİK A.Ş † Turkey New BMW AG Germany  Daimler AG Germany  DIRECTV USA New Fiat Italy  General Motors Company USA New H&M Hennes & Mauritz AB Sweden  Johnson Controls USA New Kering France New LG Electronics South Korea  Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. Japan  Reed Elsevier Group United Kingdom  Renault France New Sekisui Chemical Co., Ltd. Japan  Tofaş Türk Otomobil Fabrikası A.Ş. Turkey New Toyota Motor Corporation Japan  Volkswagen AG Germany  Wyndham Worldwide Corporation USA New YOOX SpA Italy  Consumer staples Aeon Co., Ltd. Japan New Anheuser Busch InBev Belgium  Associated British Foods United Kingdom New Coca-Cola HBC AG Switzerland New CVS Health USA New Danone France New Diageo Plc United Kingdom  Heineken NV Netherlands New J Sainsbury Plc United Kingdom New Kirin Holdings Co Ltd Japan New L’Oreal France  Morrison Supermarkets United Kingdom New Oriflame Cosmetics AB Sweden New Philip Morris International USA  Pick ‘n Pay Stores Ltd South Africa  SABMiller United Kingdom New Shiseido Co., Ltd. Japan New Sonae Portugal  Suntory Beverage & Food Japan New Unilever plc United Kingdom  Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. USA New Energy Essar Oil India New S-Oil Corporation South Korea New Solstad Offshore Norway New Spectra Energy Corp USA  Financials Aviva United Kingdom New Banco Espirito Santo Portugal New Years Company Country on CPLI Banco Santander Spain New Bank of America Merrill Lynch USA  Bankia Spain New BNY Mellon USA  CaixaBank Spain  Comerica Incorporated USA  Commerzbank AG Germany New Commonwealth Bank of Australia Australia  Daiwa House Industry Co., Ltd. Japan New Dexus Property Group Australia  Firstrand Limited South Africa  Generali Deutschland Holding AG Germany  Goldman Sachs Group Inc. USA  Henderson Group Ireland New Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. USA  HSBC Holdings plc United Kingdom  ING Group Netherlands New Insurance Australia Group Australia  Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A Italy  Investa Office Fund Australia New National Australia Bank Australia  Principal Financial Group, Inc. USA  Raiffeisen Bank International AG Austria  Redefine Properties Ltd South Africa New Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance South Korea New Sanlam South Africa New Shinhan Financial Group South Korea  Simon Property Group USA New Standard Bank Group South Africa New Standard Chartered United Kingdom New TD Bank Group Canada  The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. USA  UBS Switzerland  Wells Fargo & Company USA  Zurich Insurance Group Switzerland New Health care AstraZeneca United Kingdom New Bayer AG Germany  Elekta Sweden New Lundbeck A/S Denmark New Mediclinic International South Africa New Novozymes A/S Denmark New Olympus Corporation Japan  Industrials Abengoa Spain  Balfour Beatty United Kingdom New Bombardier Inc. Canada New bpost Belgium New Canadian National Railway Company Canada New Carillion United Kingdom  CNH Industrial NV United Kingdom New
07 Years Company Country on CPLI Cobham United Kingdom New CSX Corporation USA  Dai Nippon Printing Co., Ltd. Japan New Daikin Industries, Ltd. Japan New Dampskibsselskabet NORDEN A/S Denmark New Deutsche Bahn* Germany New Doosan Heavy Industries South Korea  & Construction Ferrovial † Spain  Finnair Finland New Flughafen München GmbH* Germany New Hyundai E&C South Korea  IHI Corporation Japan New Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. Japan New Komatsu Ltd. Japan  Larsen & Toubro India New Lockheed Martin Corporation USA  MAN SE Germany New Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd Japan New Northrop Grumman Corp USA  Royal BAM Group Netherlands New Royal Philips Netherlands  Samsung C&T South Korea  Schneider Electric France  SGS SA Switzerland  Shimizu Corporation Japan  Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Germany  Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. USA  Taisei Corporation Japan New Thales France New Toppan Printing Co., Ltd. Japan New Toshiba Corporation Japan  Toto Ltd. Japan New Information technology Accenture Ireland New Adobe Systems, Inc. USA  Akamai Technologies Inc USA New Amadeus IT Holding Spain New Apple Inc. USA New Atos SE France  Autodesk, Inc. USA  Cap Gemini France New Cisco Systems, Inc. USA  Delta Electronics Greater China New Ericsson Sweden New EVRY ASA Norway New Fujitsu Ltd. Japan  Google Inc. USA New Groupe Steria France  Hewlett-Packard USA  Hitachi, Ltd. Japan New Juniper Networks, Inc. USA New Years Company Country on CPLI Konica Minolta, Inc. Japan  Microsoft Corporation USA  Nokia Group Finland  Samsung Electro-Mechanics South Korea  Co., Ltd. Samsung Electronics South Korea  Samsung SDI South Korea  SAP AG Germany  SK Hynix South Korea  Tata Consultancy Services India  Tech Mahindra India New Vaisala Oyj Finland New Wipro India  Materials ACERINOX Spain New Anglo American Platinum South Africa New Harmony Gold Mining Co Ltd South Africa  Holmen Sweden  Israel Chemicals † Israel New Italcementi Italy New Johnson Matthey United Kingdom New LG Chem South Korea New Syngenta International AG Switzerland New Teck Resources Limited Canada New The Mosaic Company USA  UPM-Kymmene Corporation Finland New Telecommunication services Belgacom Belgium  BT Group United Kingdom  Elisa Oyj Finland New Koninklijke KPN NV (Royal KPN) Netherlands  KT Corporation South Korea  Nippon Telegraph Japan New & Telephone Corporation (NTT) Orange France  Sprint Nextel Corporation USA  Telefonica Spain  Telenor Group Norway  TeliaSonera Sweden New Utilities ACCIONA S.A. Spain  Centrica United Kingdom New EnBW Energie Baden-Württemberg AG Germany New Endesa Spain New Entergy Corporation USA  Gas Natural SDG SA Spain  Iberdrola Spain  Korea District Heating Corp. South Korea New Pepco Holdings, Inc. USA  RWE AG Germany New SSE United Kingdom  VERBUND AG Austria New  Indicates total number of years on CPLI from 2010 to 2014 inclusive Shaded areas indicate the companies that have been on CPLI every year since 2010. * CDP Mittelstand program, not included in report analysis. † Added after publication, not included in analysis.
08 What makes a global climate performance leader? “The single biggest risk that exists to the economy today” is how former U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has categorized climate change. He believes that the factors that nearly brought down the U.S. financial sector have parallels with climate change. The global challenge Economies globally have broadly strengthened but levels of manmade greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere have been increasing at record pace and are expected to reach a 40 billion metric ton high this year. This suggests that market mechanisms and big business have so far failed to decouple economic from emissions growth. However, it seems that a tipping point has been reached. In September, more than 100 of the world’s political leaders gathered at the UN Secretary General’s landmark Climate Summit, with many making public commitments on climate change. China revealed greater determination for climate progress, for the first time announcing a goal to reduce its absolute carbon emissions. The corporate world is taking equally promising steps. Research has revealed that solar and wind farms now offer viable alternatives to coal-powered plants as energy sources.¹ There have been significant developments in a global divestment movement to reduce dependency on non-renewable energy. Rockefeller Brothers Fund, alongside other influential investors, has announced the intention to sell US$50 billion of fossil fuel investments, re-investing the proceeds in clean energy systems. Identifying the leaders The investors that request companies disclose their climate related risks and opportunities through CDP represent US$92 trillion, a third of the world’s invested capital. This year, 1,971 companies have responded² to this call for critical climate change data, thereby playing a vital role in driving sustainable economies. This information has been scored using CDP’s respected methodology, primarily by FirstCarbon Solutions, CDP’s global scoring and sustainability business process outsourcing partner. 187 of these businesses – which demonstrate a superior approach to climate change – have received an A grade for their performance and a position on CDP’s Climate Performance Leadership Index (CPLI). This is the first time CDP has produced a truly global list of performance leaders, regardless of market capitalization. Qualities of leadership This definitive league – the A List – presents the public companies that are taking the most action to help drive the transformative action at scale that we so urgently need. Further, these corporations are implementing strategies that benefit their bottom line. These companies, such as Coca Cola HBC, which has saved US$20 million and reduced its emissions by 30,000 1. Levelized cost of energy analysis – Version 8.0, Lazard, September 2014 2.  1,971 company disclosures to CDP’s climate change program were analyzed for this report to determine the CPLI group. Companies that responded voluntarily or after the scoring deadline have not been included but can be viewed online at www.cdp.net. Opportunities and risks 145 (12%) Changing consumer behavior 123 (10%) Reputation 77 (6%) Fuel/energy taxes and regulation Most commonly reported opportunities Number of times reported, and % of total opportunities reported 118 (8%) Reputation 107 (7%) Change in precipitation extremes and droughts 97 (6%) Changing consumer behavior Most commonly reported risks Number of times reported, and % of total risks reported % of companies who identify risks % of companies who identify opportunities 96% leaders 88% CDP average 99% leaders 87% CDP average
09 metric tons through product design, demonstrate that a low carbon future does not mean low profit. Heightened awareness of the business implications of climate change The vast majority of CPLI companies are able to identify financial and business opportunities through their climate change strategies and actions. ​ Industrial technology firm Abengoa saves US$911 million annually having diversified its energy supply by installing two solar power plants. Samsung C&T Corporation has assessed that responding to consumer demand with green products can increase its profits from sales by at least 9% within the next seven years. CPLI companies are also more aware of the range of risks that climate change presents to its operations, helping to drive efforts to reduce emissions. Electric utility company Iberdrola has invested US$3.8 billion in electricity and energy monitoring and distribution systems to cut its emissions by 50,000 metric tons. Assessing its transportation logistics has enabled car manufacturer General Motors to implement route redesigns, mode changes from road to rail, and other measures that have resulted in emissions savings of 244,000 metric tons a year and cost savings of US$287 million. More investment for bigger reductions The CPLI is investing more proportionally than its non-leading peers in activities to reduce emissions, collectively totalling US$23 billion. As a result their initiatives are more effective; they also have a higher internal rate of return (IRR). Improving energy efficiency is by far the most popular approach to reducing emissions across all companies. On average, the CPLI’s initiatives yield annual reductions of 9% per company with an IRR for each initiative of 57%. Those of their non-leading peers, however, result in 6% and 50% respectively. A company’s overall – absolute – emissions can vary for a range of reasons including mergers and acquisitions but the A List has collectively reduced its absolute emissions by 33 million metric tons in the past reporting year, with total emissions standing at 693.7 million metric tons. Additionally, the CPLI is making significantly better progress with its targets for absolute emissions reductions than its non-leading peers. Targets of all companies – leaders and non-leaders – are generally too short-term, running to 2016/17 on average. CPLI projects to reduce emissions, however, typically span 12 years, which demonstrates a willingness for some long-term investing. Policy is cited by leaders as a risk and opportunity in almost equal measure – it is likely that a lack of clear long term policy is stalling corporate progress toward ambitious long-term targets. Leaders’ investments and savings Leaders represent: 9% of respondents 46% of investment in emissions reduction activities 11% of CO²e savings from emissions reduction activities A strong stance Taking steps to reduce climate disruption on a global scale is a clear quality of performance leadership. Three quarters (78%) of the leading businesses on the A List engage with policy makers on climate change, versus 49% of the remaining pack. Companies such as AstraZeneca, the British-Swedish pharmaceutical giant, goes one step further and promotes leading industry practice through national and international trade associations in addition to key government and international agency stakeholders. It states that, “climate change is not just an environmental challenge, but also one that affects the health and livelihood of millions of people because of the links to complex issues such as poverty, economic development and population growth.” 75%of the leaders are on track to meet their emissions reduction targets vs. 59% of their non-leading peers.
10 Realizing returns Practicing strong governance of how climate change affects their business is driving these companies to understand better how their operations impact the environmental challenges that today face the world. In turn, these companies are taking action to minimize their contribution to a changing climate and to reduce their reliance on natural resources. With such a robust approach to managing these issues, it is perhaps no surprise that the CPLI generates superior returns for its shareholders than other global indices and has outperformed the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index by 19.6% and the Bloomberg World Index by 9.6% (see page 14 for details). Get more from CDP data The analysis presented in this report is a brief summary of a subset of the data available through CDP. We encourage all readers of this report to view the full corporate responses individually from our website. Enhanced and unlimited access to the data is available through the CDP analytics tool which makes benchmarking and trend analysis simple via a series of interactive dashboards and export functions. Different versions of the tool are available for investors and companies. Visit www.cdp.net to find out more. Total Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions by sector Mt CO²e 0 20 40 60 80 387 411 370 UtilitiesIndustrialsMaterialsConsumer staples Consumer discretionary EnergyInformation technology Telecom- munication services HealthcareFinancials 2012 2013 2014 Policy: Risk or opportunity? 94%of leader companies report policy as a risk 98%of leader companies report policy as an opportunity CO ² e emissions reduced by CPLI in the past year: 33Mt
11 2014 leadership criteria Each year, company responses are analyzed and scored against two parallel scoring schemes: performance and disclosure. This report focuses solely on performance and includes only those companies that enter the Climate Performance Leadership Index (CPLI) and achieve the highest ‘A’ band. The performance score assesses the level of action, as reported by the company, on climate change mitigation, adaptation and transparency. Its intent is to highlight positive climate action as demonstrated by a company’s CDP response. A high performance score signals that a company is measuring, verifying and managing its carbon footprint, for example by setting and meeting carbon reduction targets and implementing programs to reduce emissions in both its direct operations and supply chain. In addition to the performance leaders CDP would like to commend all companies that achieved the performance bands of A– and B this year for the excellent work they are doing with regards to climate change. This group accounts for 32% of the total number of companies that had their disclosures to CDP’s climate change program scored. It is clear from reading these responses that these companies are putting considerable resource and effort into mitigating climate risk and maximizing climate opportunities. While they do not qualify for climate performance leadership as defined by the CDP scoring methodology in 2014, many of them have been leaders in previous years. They are continuing on their pathway of investing in emission reductions, and driving this issue up through their management structure and out through their value chains. What are the CPLI criteria? To enter the CPLI (Performance Band A), a company must: ^^ Make its response public and submit via CDP’s Online Response System ^^ Attain a performance score greater than 85 ^^ Score maximum performance points on question 12.1a (absolute emissions performance) for GHG reductions due to emission reduction actions over the past year (4% or above in 2014) ^^ Disclose gross global Scope 1 and Scope 2 figures ^^ Score maximum performance points for verification of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions ^^ Furthermore, CDP reserves the right to exclude any company from the CPLI if there is anything in its response or other publicly available information that calls into question its suitability for inclusion. Note: Companies that achieve a performance score high enough to warrant inclusion in the CPLI, but do not meet all of the other CPLI requirements are classed as Performance Band A- but are not included in the CPLI. How is the CPLI used by investors? Good performance scores are used by investors as a proxy of good climate change management or climate change performance of companies. Investors identify and then engage with companies to encourage them to improve their score. The ‘Aiming for A’ initiative which was initiated by CCLA Investment Management is driven by a coalition of UK asset owners and mutual fund managers. They are asking major UK-listed utilities and extractives companies to aim for inclusion in the CPLI. This may involve filing supportive shareholder resolutions for Annual General Meetings occurring after September 2014. Investors are also using CDP scores for creation of financial products. For example, Nedbank in South Africa developed the Nedbank Green Index. Disclosure scores are used for selecting stocks and performance scores for assigning weight. For further information on the CPLI and how scores are determined, please visit www.cdp.net/ guidance.
12 United Kingdom 252/19Respondents/Leaders Turkey 26/2 Switzerland 64/5 Italy 45/4 Canada 97/4 USA 342/34 Sweden 48/6 Spain 39/11 South Africa 66/8 Portugal 12/2 Norway 30/3 Netherlands 30/5 Ireland 16/2 Germany 89/11 France 84/10 Finland 36/5 Denmark 20/3 Belgium 11/3 Austria 14/2 Where are the performance leaders? Respondent numbers for certain countries may differ from regional CDP reports due to submission date of response for inclusion in analysis/scoring and difference between company location and exchange/index listings. This map includes data only from countries that produced climate performance leaders. More than 4,500 companies from more than 80 countries use CDP to manage and share vital environmental information.
13 Greater China 88/1 Australia 76/5 South Korea 86/14 Japan 216/24 India 46/5 Resp In 2014 nearly 2,000 businesses shared climate change information with CDP and the investors that requested it. Each of these companies is commended for responding to the call, regardless of its score. Insights from CDP data are used by investors and other decision makers to help catalyze action to achieve sustainable economies. Almost half of the performance leaders are headquartered in Europe, with a further third located in USA or Japan. More than a quarter of the Spanish and Belgian companies that took part in CDP’s climate change program were awarded an A for performance, proportionally giving Spain and Belgium the most leaders. Portugal, the Netherlands and South Korea have also performed well in this regard. Of those corporations that failed to respond, the three largest in terms of market capitalization are Berkshire Hathaway, Amazon.com Inc and Comcast Corporation.
14 Investor analysis: Climate change action and market performance ECPI is based in Milan and Luxembourg and is dedicated to constructing investable products around the concept of sustainability. In order to gauge the influence of leadership in carbon management on the market performance of a company, ECPI compared the market performance of the Climate Performance Leaders Index (CPLI)1 against that of a broad market index, the Bloomberg World Index,2 and that of a global sustainability index, the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index (DJSWI),3 for the period since the launch of the CPLI in October 2010. The results support the adoption of quantitative carbon data in developing investment strategies. Over this four year period the CPLI gained 37.53%, outperforming the Bloomberg World Index which gained 34.24% and the DJSWI which gained 31.38%. Looking more closely at the geographic breakdown of these indexes,4 the CPLI contains fewer emerging market companies than the Bloomberg World Index and a greater concentration of UK companies. The CPLI also has a greater concentration of US companies than the DJSWI. CPLI 37.53% Bloomberg World Index 34.24% Dow Jones Sustainability World Index 31.38% CPLI financial performance 2010–2014 900 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 Sept 22Oct 1 20142013201220112010 Index, October 1, 2010=1,000. Prices calculated in US$. Source: data in US$ from 1/10/2010 to 22/9/2014, source ECPI based on data by Thomson Reuters Datastream and Bloomberg. At an industry level, the CPLI is over-weight in financial and ICT companies versus the other indexes as com- panies in these sectors have on average been quicker to integrate climate change into their core business strategy and set and met emissions reduction targets. Conversely, the CPLI is under-weight in energy, basic materials and industrials companies as companies in these sectors have on average found it tougher to improve their carbon efficiency and performance. The CPLI is therefore a good tool to infer the performance of the world market, while protecting the portfolio against the physical, regulatory and reputational risks associated with carbon emissions and promoting the reduction of emissions at company level. In future it might be interesting to develop an index with the same industry weightings as the world market and companies ranked according to their CDP performance score.
15 1. The Index is built using the historical composition of the CPLI, as annually assessed by CDP according to its proprietary methodology. The index adopts a market capital- ization weighting system. The index composition is updated annually, in October, to reflect the results of that year’s scoring assessment. 2. The Bloomberg World Index is a capitalization weighted index of all equities included in the Bloomberg World Index Series. Equities in the series were in the top 85% mar- ket capitalization of their respective Bloomberg Classification Sector at the time of the rebalance. The index series is rebalanced semi- annually in February and August. 3. The Dow Jones Sustainability World Index is composed of global sustainability leaders as identified by RobecoSAM through a corporate sustainability assessment. The index represents the top 10% of the largest 2,500 companies in the S&P Global BMI based on long-term economic, environmental and social criteria. Review frequency: annually in September. 4. It is worth mentioning that this comparison is influenced by the dimension of the indices and different standards adopted for industry classification. United States 39.98% United Kingdom 10.98% Switzerland 9.76% Germany 7.67% Germany 7.94% France 7.20% Spain 5.27% China 7.48% Japan 6.93% France 3.58% Other 36.58% Other 33.04% United Kingdom 10.84% United States 31.36% United States 40.51% Japan 7.42% Bloomberg World Index as of September 22, 2014 Dow Jones Sustainability World Index as of August 31, 2014 CPLI as of September 22, 2014 CPLI vs. Bloomberg World CPLI vs. DJ Sustainability World 0.53% 9.15% 5.39% –0.14% n.a. 0.27% 0.49% n.a. –8.57% –5.03% United Kingdom 5.45% n.a. n.a. Other 28.01% Sources: Bloomberg World Index, Bloomberg as of 22/9/2014; DJSWI index factsheet as of 31/8/2014 CDP index: ECPI based on data from CDP and TR Datastream. Data as of 22/9/2014. Geographic breakdown Bloomberg World Index as of September 22, 2014 DJ Sustainability World Index as of August 31, 2014 CPLI as of September 22 , 2014 CPLI vs. Bloomberg CPLI vs. DJ Sustainability Financials 22.43% Financials 21.62% Information technology 27.93% 16.45% 15.45% Consumer discretionary 12.22% Consumer goods 13.09% Financials 24.32% 1.89% 2.70% Industrials 11.79% Technology 12.48% Consumer staples 15.69% 6.50% 2.60% Information technology 11.48% Industrials 12.10% Consumer discretionary 10.05% –2.17% 3.16% Consumer staples 9.19% Health care 11.92% Industrials 8.10% –3.69% –4.00% Energy 9.03% Basic materials 8.71% Telecommunication services 4.86% 0.36% 2.91% Health care 8.75% Oil and gas 8.61% Health care 3.27% –5.76% –8.65% Materials 6.91% Consumer services 6.89% Utilities 3.09% –0.53% 0.46% Telecommunication services 4.50% Utilities 2.63% Materials 1.68% –5.23% –6.93% Utilities 3.62% Telecommunications 1.95% Energy 1.00% –7.74% –7.71% n.a. 0.07% Industry breakdown
16 Emissions trend and financial intensity Auto components Johnson Controls Automobiles BMW AG Daimler AG Fiat General Motors Company Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. Renault Tofaș Türk Otomobil Fabrikası A.Ș. Toyota Motor Corporation Volkswagen AG Hotels, restaurants and leisure Wyndham Worldwide Corporation Household durables LG Electronics Sekisui Chemical Co., Ltd. Internet and catalogue retail YOOX SpA Media DIRECTV Reed Elsevier Group Specialty retail H&M Hennes & Mauritz AB Textiles, apparel and luxury goods Kering 2,305,828 1,415,641 3,356,000 4,178,320 8,416,034 3,430,215 1,260,493 112,127 7,611,000 9,038,463 429,809 1,263,867 828,026 1,290 195,820 122,846 356,374 123,388 54 14 21 36 54 29 23 30 29 35 86 49 66 2 6 13 18 10 Financial intensity‡2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e†Emissions trend* Top investment areas * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. × × × ×× 149 M 116 M 0.5 Mt 0.03 Mt 0.07 Mt 0.2 Mt 0.08 Mt 11 M 13 M 80 M 20 M 116 M 102 M 80 M Energy effiency: building fabric Energy effiency: building services Low carbon energy installation Behavioral change Energy efficiency: processes Investment required $449 M Annual monetary savings $239 M Annual CO²e savings 0.8 Mt CO²e Consumer discretionary Sector analysis These leading companies are acutely aware of both the risks and opportunities associated with the changing demands and expectations of the consumer market and with the obligations that come from changes to product labeling and product standards. They generally see more opportunity to capitalize on these potential changes as a way to differentiate their products and to gain market share, and expect them to have a medium to high impact within the next three years. With regard to Scope 3 emissions this group of leading companies is making good progress in reporting the most important and relevant categories. These leaders report good levels of engagement on climate change and emissions with their value chain, primarily through their suppliers, but also with customers and other partners. Nissan should be commended for being the only company in this group to set an absolute target beyond 2020, reporting a target of 24% reduction across Scope 1, 2 and 3 by 2050. Consumer awareness in environmental issues, especially in climate change, is the most important component for LGE’s long term business strategy… the resulting strategies and managerial processes have provided opportunities for competitive advantage. LG Electronics
17 Being the inventor of the automobile, we accept our responsibility for its future. Our Road to emission-free mobility strategy sets clear goals: Promotion of low-carbon products and services with state-of-the-art internal combustion engines, tailor-made hybridisation and spearheading the development of local emission-free propulsion technologies. We want to be best in class with the CO² emissons of our products. As a commitment to the European Union climate targets – cutting absolute CO² emissions by 20% from 1990 to 2020 – we translated the EU target into a reduction target for our own European plants. Thus, production emissions per vehicle will decrease by two-thirds. Our Design for Environment process as well as our efforts in life-cycle assessment helped us become the world’s first manufacturer to receive an Environmental Certificate for the Mercedes-Benz S-Class in 2005. We continue this holistic approach to mitigate climate impact from our own operations while taking into account upstream and downstream effects. Daimler AG Sector profile Daimler AG
18 Consumer staples Sector analysis Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Beverages Anheuser Busch InBev Coca-Cola HBC AG Diageo Plc Heineken NV Kirin Holdings Co Ltd SABMiller Suntory Beverage & Food Food and staples retailing Aeon Co., Ltd. CVS Health J Sainsbury Plc Morrison Supermarkets Pick ‘n Pay Stores Ltd Sonae Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Food products Associated British Foods Danone Unilever plc Personal products L’Oréal Oriflame Cosmetics AB Shiseido Co., Ltd. Tobacco Philip Morris International 5,285,095 741,684 701,388 1,882,389 1,140,369 1,839,413 232,253 2,529,095 1,659,100 1,362,815 1,082,818 582,518 241,725 21,435,137 3,144,397 1,238,822 1,953,147 192,456 35,195 77,150 828,407 122 81 39 74 49 106 20 41 13 40 38 82 38 46 151 44 30 6 19 9 27 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available ×× 358 M 297 M 0.5 Mt 0.5 Mt 0.4 Mt 0.06 Mt 0.04 Mt 38 M 40 M 12 M 151 M 104 M 42 M Energy effiency: building fabric Low carbon energy installation Energy efficiency: processes Low carbon energy purchase Energy efficiency: building services Investment required $668 M Annual monetary savings $390 M Annual CO²e savings 1.4 Mt CO²e Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Beverages Anheuser Busch InBev Coca-Cola HBC AG Diageo Plc Heineken NV Kirin Holdings Co Ltd SABMiller Suntory Beverage & Food Food and staples retailing Aeon Co., Ltd. CVS Health J Sainsbury Plc Morrison Supermarkets Pick ‘n Pay Stores Ltd Sonae Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Food products Associated British Foods Danone Unilever plc Personal products L’Oréal Oriflame Cosmetics AB Shiseido Co., Ltd. Tobacco Philip Morris International 5,285,095 741,684 701,388 1,882,389 1,140,369 1,839,413 232,253 2,529,095 1,659,100 1,362,815 1,082,818 582,518 241,725 21,435,137 3,144,397 1,238,822 1,953,147 192,456 35,195 77,150 828,407 122 81 39 74 49 106 20 41 13 40 38 82 38 46 151 44 30 6 19 9 27 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available ×× 358 M 297 M 0.5 Mt 0.5 Mt 0.4 Mt 0.06 Mt 0.04 Mt 38 M 40 M 12 M 151 M 104 M 42 M Energy effiency: building fabric Low carbon energy installation Energy efficiency: processes Low carbon energy purchase Energy efficiency: building services Investment required $668 M Annual monetary savings $390 M Annual CO²e savings 1.4 Mt CO²e Similar to its peers in the discretionary sector, this group cites changing consumer behavior as the most important short-term risk and opportunity, noting that it will gain more business from an enhanced reputation, than it would lose from a damaged reputation. Changes in weather patterns that would affect raw material crop yields is cited as a significant longer-term risk by the sector, which is largely comprised of food producers and retailers. Almost all of the leaders in this sector engage with their suppliers on climate change and emissions, with half using this engagement to identify reduction opportunities, while a third use that data to score suppliers through their procurement process.  On the topic of corporate influence, this group is mostly supportive of climate legislation and virtually every company says the position of their trade associations is consistent with its own corporate position.  A third of the companies have an absolute reduction target to 2020 but only one – Kirin Holdings from Japan – has an absolute target beyond this to 2050 set at 50% for its whole value chain. Collectively, this group reduced its absolute emissions by 840,000 metric tons CO²e in the last reporting year. Food security is a key driver in longer term business decisions... it drives our aims to source more of our private label products locally and is an explicit evaluation criteria in our technology evaluations on food waste…we have changed the sourcing patterns of some fresh produce to account for changing weather conditions. Pick n Pay Holdings
19 Sector profile CVS Health As a pharmacy innovation company, our goal is to reinvent pharmacy and focus on solutions that benefit millions of people. This business vision is fully integrated into our corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategy, Prescription for a Better World, which charts our CSR course for the future, focusing on three priorities: building healthier communities; protecting the planet; and creating economic opportunities. Our approach to CSR ties directly to our purpose: helping people on their path to better health, which we believe is intrinsically linked to the sustainability of our planet. At CVS Health, we have made protecting the planet a strategic priority and are working to reduce our resource use and embed sustainability into our products and supply chain. In 2010, we set a 2018 goal to reduce our carbon intensity by 15 percent per square foot of retail space and we continue to make significant progress and are tracking positively toward that goal. CVS Health
20 Energy Sector analysis This sector has very few companies that are able to meet the leadership criteria under CDP’s current scoring methodology. More information about how CDP is working with the oil and gas industry to develop a sector-specific approach is provided on the next page.  From the five energy companies that have achieved an A band and a position on the CPLI, the biggest risks reported were around regulation, such as cap and trade schemes, air pollution limits and carbon taxes. All of these risks are expected to impact within three years. Tropical cyclones are reported as the biggest short-term physical risk due to the costly damage that can be inflicted on fixed assets, which are often located in exposed areas.  Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Energy equipment and services Solstad Offshore Oil, gas and consumable fuels Essar Oil S-Oil Corporation Spectra Energy Corp 509,606 6,036,218 7,293,142 9,211,186 856 n/a§ 256 1,451 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. § US$ revenue figure unavailable 750 M 60 M 376 M 0.7 Mt 0.5 Mt 0.4 Mt 0.2 Mt 53 M 33 M 31 M Energy effiency: processes Low carbon energy installation Process emissions reductions Low carbon energy purchase Fugitive emissions reductions Investment required $869 M Annual monetary savings $450 M Annual CO²e savings 1.8 Mt CO²e Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Energy equipment and services Solstad Offshore Oil, gas and consumable fuels Essar Oil S-Oil Corporation Spectra Energy Corp 509,606 6,036,218 7,293,142 9,211,186 856 n/a§ 256 1,451 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. § US$ revenue figure unavailable 750 M 60 M 376 M 0.7 Mt 0.5 Mt 0.4 Mt 0.2 Mt 53 M 33 M 31 M Energy effiency: processes Low carbon energy installation Process emissions reductions Low carbon energy purchase Fugitive emissions reductions Investment required $869 M Annual monetary savings $450 M Annual CO²e savings 1.8 Mt CO²e Spectra Energy’s Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) process addresses key risks for the corporation. Material risks posed by climate change are assessed and incorporated into the ERM process. These include financial and strategic risks… A company-wide business development process is used to evaluate business opportunities including those driven by climate change such as demand growth due to carbon prices and regulatory frameworks. Spectra Energy
21 Energy sector development CDP is increasing its focus on a number of key sectors, prioritized for their dependence and impact on climate change, water and deforestation. This will help to drive more targeted and effective action by companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, safeguard water resources, and prevent the destruction of forests. This move towards greater sector focus is a result of consultation with stakeholders including investors and responding companies. CDP will be implementing this approach gradually over the next three years, initially through the focus on our climate change program, and then expanding this work to cover additional environmen- tal areas. In 2015 the sector approach will be piloted on the oil and gas¹ sector, which has been prioritized for its rele- vance to climate change. The aim is to produce data that is more meaningful to investors, reduce reporting requirements for key sectors, incentivize transparency and catalyze sector-specific action. The sector approach involves: ^^ Consulting directly with investors and industry representatives, to assess the relevance of existing CDP questions that oil and gas companies have been requested to disclose to date, both from CDP’s climate change question- naire, as well as from the supplemen- tary oil and gas sector module; ^^ Adjusting climate change reporting requirements for oil and gas companies accordingly to reflect the most relevant areas for the sector and its investors; ^^ Developing sector specific guidance to drive standardization and support reporting companies; ^^ Developing a sector specific scoring methodology to assess the level of detail and comprehensiveness of oil and gas companies’ disclosures and their level of action taken on climate change; and ^^ In the longer term, introducing chang- es to CDP’s Online Response System (ORS) to provide more intuitive means to report sector-specific information. Benefits include: ^^ Collecting the most relevant and usable information for investors, decision makers and other stakeholders; ^^ Focusing companies on disclosing and taking action on key issues identified for their relevance to the environment and investors; and ^^ Providing a more meaningful assessment of companies’ progress on climate change. CDP is working closely with industry and investor representatives to develop a sector-specific climate change questionnaire for oil and gas companies ahead of the 2015 CDP disclosure period. CDP will consult on proposed changes to the climate change questions pertaining to the oil and gas sector in October 2014. 1. For O&G, CDP is initially focusing on the following sub-industries under the Global Industry Classification Standard: Integrated Oil & Gas (10102010); Oil & Gas Exploration & Production (10102020); and Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing (10102030).
22 Financials Sector analysis Emissions trend and financial intensity Top investment areas Capital markets BNY Mellon Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Henderson Group UBS Commercial banks Banco Espirito Santo Banco Santander Bankia CaixaBank Comerica Incorporated Commerzbank AG Commonwealth Bank of Australia HSBC Holdings plc Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A National Australia Bank Raiffeisen Bank International AG Shinhan Financial Group Standard Bank Group Standard Chartered TD Bank Group Wells Fargo & Company Diversified financial services Bank of America Firstrand Limited ING Group Insurance Aviva Generali Deutschland Holding AG Insurance Australia Group Principal Financial Group, Inc. Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Sanlam The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. Zurich Insurance Group Real estate investment trusts Dexus Property Group Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. Investa Office Fund Redefine Properties Ltd Simon Property Group Real estate management and development Daiwa House Industry Co., Ltd. 216,396 260,209 2,223 162,813 25,030 321,988 4,271 34,494 75,839 51,344 142,498 683,376 111,737 198,388 632 105,663 353,995 250,605 207,381 1,376,340 1,448,398 248,688 88,483 78,629 31,267 44,822 60,883 33,105 39,124 74,364 125,984 111,240 590,056 35,168 44,844 482,074 351,417 14 6 2 4 4 4 0.5 5 29 2 3 8 3 5 0.05 104 26 10 7 16 14 29 1 1 1 5 7 2 4 3 2 182 114 194 127 93 14 Financial intensity‡2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e†Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available ×× ×× × 0.07 Mt 87 M 23 M 5 M 15 M 11 M 29 M 18 M 6 M 4 M 0.01 Mt 0.08 Mt 0.01 Mt Low carbon energy installation Process emissions reductions Energy efficiency: building fabric Transportation: use Energy efficiency: building services Investment required $143 M Annual monetary savings $55 M Annual CO²e savings 0.17 Mt CO²e Emissions trend and financial intensity Top investment areas Capital markets BNY Mellon Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Henderson Group UBS Commercial banks Banco Espirito Santo Banco Santander Bankia CaixaBank Comerica Incorporated Commerzbank AG Commonwealth Bank of Australia HSBC Holdings plc Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A National Australia Bank Raiffeisen Bank International AG Shinhan Financial Group Standard Bank Group Standard Chartered TD Bank Group Wells Fargo & Company Diversified financial services Bank of America Firstrand Limited ING Group Insurance Aviva Generali Deutschland Holding AG Insurance Australia Group Principal Financial Group, Inc. Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Sanlam The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. Zurich Insurance Group Real estate investment trusts Dexus Property Group Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. Investa Office Fund Redefine Properties Ltd Simon Property Group Real estate management and development Daiwa House Industry Co., Ltd. 216,396 260,209 2,223 162,813 25,030 321,988 4,271 34,494 75,839 51,344 142,498 683,376 111,737 198,388 632 105,663 353,995 250,605 207,381 1,376,340 1,448,398 248,688 88,483 78,629 31,267 44,822 60,883 33,105 39,124 74,364 125,984 111,240 590,056 35,168 44,844 482,074 351,417 14 6 2 4 4 4 0.5 5 29 2 3 8 3 5 0.05 104 26 10 7 16 14 29 1 1 1 5 7 2 4 3 2 182 114 194 127 93 14 Financial intensity‡2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e†Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available ×× ×× × 0.07 Mt 87 M 23 M 5 M 15 M 11 M 29 M 18 M 6 M 4 M 0.01 Mt 0.08 Mt 0.01 Mt Low carbon energy installation Process emissions reductions Energy efficiency: building fabric Transportation: use Energy efficiency: building services Investment required $143 M Annual monetary savings $55 M Annual CO²e savings 0.17 Mt CO²e This sector has the second highest number of performance leaders with 37 achieving the A band. Like many other sectors they cite reputation and changing consumer behavior as one of the most significant opportunities in the next three years for attracting and retaining both staff and customers. Three quarters report employee engagement and behavioral change as a key driver to achieving reductions with a payback of less than one year when combined with having a dedicated budget for energy efficiency that improves their building performance. This sector accounts for 30% of all CPLI references to employee engagement as a key driver of reductions.  Many reported short term risks from uncertainty around new regulation, as well as the potential impact of product efficiency regulation, incoming cap and trade schemes, fuel/ energy regulation and carbon taxes. With regard to Scope 3 reporting, half the group reports that the emissions associated with their investments are ‘relevant, but not yet calculated.’ This highlights a focus area for the financial sector if it is to fully understand its deeper impact on climate change.  Six of the companies have set absolute reduction targets to 2020. Goldman Sachs goes the furthest with a 100% target to be carbon neutral in all their offices and data centers. Collectively, this group reduced its absolute emissions by 340,000 metric tons CO²e in the last reporting year.”
23 Sector profile National Australia Bank Climate change is a key focus of NAB Group’s Environmental Agenda. We believe that developing our understanding of environmental challenges and managing our environmental dependencies, impacts and risks enables us to develop solutions that help our customers to take action as well. Through improved design, operation, and efficiency improvements, we have reduced our business as usual carbon emissions by more than 30% since 2006. We continue to pilot clean technology, having installed a tri-generation plant at our largest data centre and solar PV on some retail stores. We are committed to supporting the significant infrastructure demands of a lower-carbon economy through project financing for large-scale renewable energy projects in key markets. We also helped develop and provide Environmental Upgrade Agreement (EUA) finance in Australia, which funds environmental improvements in office buildings. We have assisted in funding seven EUAs, with a total investment of $12.5 million and collective savings of $0.6m per annum as a result of energy and maintenance efficiencies. National Australia Bank
24 Health care Sector analysis Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Biotechnology Novozymes A/S Healthcare equipment and services Elekta Olympus Corporation Mediclinic International Pharmaceuticals AstraZeneca Bayer AG Lundbeck A/S 383,482 9,420 115,419 173,026 599,800 8,372,000 28,352 183 6 13 60 23 157 10 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. 0.2 Mt48 M 25 M 5 M 5 M 4 M 15 M 8 M 8 M 0.01 Mt 0.04 Mt 0.04 Mt 0.02 Mt Low carbon energy installation Energy efficiensy: building fabric Energy efficiency: building services Transportation: fleet Energy efficiency: processes Investment required $80 M Annual monetary savings $40 M Annual CO²e savings 0.3 Mt CO²e Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Biotechnology Novozymes A/S Healthcare equipment and services Elekta Olympus Corporation Mediclinic International Pharmaceuticals AstraZeneca Bayer AG Lundbeck A/S 383,482 9,420 115,419 173,026 599,800 8,372,000 28,352 183 6 13 60 23 157 10 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. 0.2 Mt48 M 25 M 5 M 5 M 15 M 8 M 0.01 Mt 0.04 Mt Low carbon energy installation Energy efficiency: building services Energy efficiency: processes Investment required $80 M Annual monetary savings $40 M Annual CO²e savings 0.3 Mt CO²e This sector is relatively small and so, as expected, has only a small number of leaders. It is promising that five of the seven are in the CPLI for the first time. All seven companies report engagement with suppliers primarily for the purpose of identifying reduction actions, but there are interesting variations in Scope 3 reporting. This indicates that the assessment of relevance of Scope 3 categories can differ significantly within the same sector.  With regard to target setting, Bayer is the only health care performance leader setting absolute and intensity targets to 2020. No other has targets that go beyond 2016, demonstrating that the sector could raise its ambition for target setting. All health care leaders report that a board member is responsible for climate change and all except one have some form of monetary reward for achieving climate or energy related targets or key performance indicators. An interesting longer-term risk, albeit low impact, noted by AstraZeneca is the impact of ‘increasing humanitarian demands’ due to disaster or crisis relief in the future showing that there is certainly awareness that the impacts of climate change could affect business. Companies cite changing weather patterns and increased flooding and drought as posing risk to production sites, although Olympus notes that as a provider of equipment that can inspect water pipes it may be able to increase its business if water pipes are damaged more frequently in future due to extreme weather. It is increasingly being recognised that climate change is not just an environmental issue, but also one that affects the health and livelihood of millions of people…An Energy Board, now reconstituted as the Energy, Carbon and Water Strategy Team has been created to provide a global framework for analysing options, prioritising investments and resources, and to foster the sharing of best practice in energy technology around our global business. AstraZeneca
25 Sector profile Elekta Elekta’s two-fold strategy is to address environmental requirements in major projects and systems to make significant step changes to the benefit of the climate, while also continuously improving products and processes that contribute on a smaller scale. Participating in CDP’s climate change program has helped highlight our main areas of influence to climate change. As a result, Elekta has invested in equipment to reduce emissions by capturing SF6 in production, a potent greenhouse gas but necessary cooling agent, and to return it to the suppliers for cleaning or destruction. Providing energy-efficient products will become even more important in the future. One of Elekta’s main cancer treatment products, the linear accelerator, is built on technology that enables clinics to reduce their energy need by approximately 30%, and thus their cost of treatments. The products also enable treatment capacity in emerging markets, where energy supplies might be both limited and costly. Elekta
26 Emissions trend and financial intensity Top investment areas Aerospace and defense Bombardier Inc. Cobham Lockheed Martin Corporation Northrop Grumman Corp Thales Air freight and logistics bpost Airlines Finnair Building products Daikin Industries, Ltd. Toto Ltd. Commercial services and supplies Dai Nippon Printing Co., Ltd. Toppan Printing Co., Ltd. Construction and engineering Abengoa Balfour Beatty Carillion Doosan Heavy Industries & Construction Hyundai E&C Larsen & Toubro Royal BAM Group nv Shimizu Corporation Taisei Corporation Electrical equipment Schneider Electric Industrial conglomerates Royal Philips Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Toshiba Corporation Machinery CNH Industrial NV IHI Corporation Komatsu Ltd. MAN SE Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. Marine Dampskibsselskabet NORDEN A/S Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd Professional services SGS SA Road and rail Canadian National Railway Company CSX Corporation Deutsche Bahn Trading companies and distributors Samsung C&T Transportation infrastructure Flughafen München GmbH 316,244 134,724 1,107,832 609,047 248,295 74,946 2,361,189 1,317,960 316,164 1,059,100 1,099,758 3,984,008 434,610 177,927 274,525 51,658 602,233 270,809 256,449 237,100 464,826 851,689 2,335,921 2,759,000 536,945 242,666 438,297 463,756 350,662 273,560 11,417,009 18,332,853 229,210 5,404,327 5,564,960 9,941,900 62,444 100,175 17 48 24 34 13 23 741 84 55 60 60 408 32 34 45 5 44 29 15 14 15 27 23 40 16 16 19 22 32 127 831 1,004 36 526 463 256 4 65 Financial intensity‡2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e†Emissions trend* * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. × × × × × × × × Transportation: fleet Energy efficiency processes Process emissions reductions Energy efficiency: building services Low carbon energy installation Investment required $3,973 M Annual monetary savings $1,216 M Annual CO²e savings 1.4 Mt CO²e 0.55 Mt 0.27 Mt 0.4 Mt 0.09 Mt 0.06 Mt 2 B 915 M 166 M 52 M 70 M 1.8 B Industrials Sector analysis For the first time this sector produced the highest number (38) of performance leaders showing that it is stepping up its efforts to tackle climate change, reduce its impact and lessen its exposure. The responses show that many companies see reputation and changing consumer behavior as one of the biggest risks. However, defining a competitive advantage within the next three years is also one of the biggest opportunities. On the physical side, many companies report that the biggest risk in the next year is the damage and disruption caused by tropical cyclones and increased extremes in precipitation and drought.  More than three quarters of these leaders engage with their suppliers, and over half with their customers in order to manage risk and the impact of regulation in their supply chain, to identify areas for reduction action and to stimulate the development of new products.  Eight of the leaders in this sector have absolute targets out to 2020 with the % reduction ranging from 7% to 35%. 
27 Sector profile Siemens Aktiengesellschaft When it comes to energy efficiency, environmental and economic benefits go successfully hand in hand. With innovative, resource- and energy-efficient technologies, we provide our customers with a competitive edge and support them in cutting energy costs and reducing their CO² emissions. One among many examples are the use of optimized drive technologies, which can cut energy consumption by up to 70% and significantly reduce total cost of ownership. While applying them in our own operations as our contribution to “walk the talk,” the much bigger impact in terms of carbon abatement is at our customers. In the last fiscal year we were able to help our customers reduce their CO² emissions by 377 million metric tons through products, solutions and services from the Siemens Environmental Portfolio. This equals the carbon emissions of approximately 45% of Germany’s annual carbon emissions. Siemens Aktiengesellschaft
28 Information technology Sector analysis Emissions trend and financial intensity Top investment areas Communications equipment Cisco Systems, Inc. Ericsson Juniper Networks, Inc. Nokia Group Computers and peripherals Apple Inc. Hewlett-Packard Electronic equipment, instruments and components Delta Electronics Hitachi, Ltd. Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd. Samsung SDI Vaisala Oyj Internet software and services Akamai Technologies Inc Google Inc. IT services Accenture Amadeus IT Holding Atos SE Cap Gemini EVRY ASA Fujitsu Ltd. Groupe Steria Tata Consultancy Services Tech Mahindra Wipro Office electronics Konica Minolta, Inc. Semiconductors and equipment Samsung Electronics SK Hynix Software Adobe Systems, Inc. Autodesk, Inc. Microsoft Corporation SAP AG 722,204 356,900 98,903 157,200 121,898 1,795,000 262,284 3,888,476 932,999 819,850 7,063 103,624 1,286,626 265,143 19,659 74,079 156,268 12,305 949,000 13,757 422,589 100,599 256,244 402,289 8,018,000 4,494,307 43,057 4,450 1,317,029 220,356 15 10 21 9 1 16 6 36 167 225 19 66 22 9 5 6 12 6 18 6 36 80 37 41 55 354 10 2 17 10 Financial intensity‡2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e†Emissions trend* 'Other' includes a variety of energy saving measures, such as improving facilities and voluntary staff initiatives. Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available × × × × 0.1 Mt 86 M 31 M 3 M 68 M31 M 31 M 8 M 0.03 Mt 0.4 MtLow carbon energy installation Other Energy efficiency: processes Transportation: fleet Energy efficiency: building services Investment required $156 M Annual monetary savings $105 M Annual CO²e savings 0.5 Mt CO²e Emissions trend and financial intensity Top investment areas Communications equipment Cisco Systems, Inc. Ericsson Juniper Networks, Inc. Nokia Group Computers and peripherals Apple Inc. Hewlett-Packard Electronic equipment, instruments and components Delta Electronics Hitachi, Ltd. Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd. Samsung SDI Vaisala Oyj Internet software and services Akamai Technologies Inc Google Inc. IT services Accenture Amadeus IT Holding Atos SE Cap Gemini EVRY ASA Fujitsu Ltd. Groupe Steria Tata Consultancy Services Tech Mahindra Wipro Office electronics Konica Minolta, Inc. Semiconductors and equipment Samsung Electronics SK Hynix Software Adobe Systems, Inc. Autodesk, Inc. Microsoft Corporation SAP AG 722,204 356,900 98,903 157,200 121,898 1,795,000 262,284 3,888,476 932,999 819,850 7,063 103,624 1,286,626 265,143 19,659 74,079 156,268 12,305 949,000 13,757 422,589 100,599 256,244 402,289 8,018,000 4,494,307 43,057 4,450 1,317,029 220,356 15 10 21 9 1 16 6 36 167 225 19 66 22 9 5 6 12 6 18 6 36 80 37 41 55 354 10 2 17 10 Financial intensity‡2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e†Emissions trend* 'Other' includes a variety of energy saving measures, such as improving facilities and voluntary staff initiatives. Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available × × × × 0.1 Mt 86 M 31 M 3 M 68 M31 M 31 M 8 M 0.03 Mt 0.4 MtLow carbon energy installation Other Energy efficiency: processes Transportation: fleet Energy efficiency: building services Investment required $156 M Annual monetary savings $105 M Annual CO²e savings 0.5 Mt CO²e This sector is widely understood to be one of the fundamental driving forces of change in the business and consumer societies. Data centers can use large amounts of energy so any shifts to renewable power sources for data centers can have a significant effect. Unsurprisingly for such a forward thinking group of companies, reputation is a major concern for the sector and is frequently cited in both risk and opportunity assessments. Delivering innovation to meet product efficiency regulations is another well-reported opportunity.   A number of companies also highlighted the impacts felt throughout the industry in the wake of the 2011 Thailand floods which severely impacted on the supply of components to meet orders, thus affecting the bottom line. As it is very likely this type of flooding will happen again, it necessitated a strategic re- evaluation of alternative sources for these critical elements of the supply chain.  With regard to reduction target setting, a number of companies have absolute targets out to 2020, but only Konica Minolta is looking beyond this with a long-term target out to 2050. 
29 1 As of March 1, 2014. Among white OLED lighting panels with a luminance area of 15 cm² or greater. Based on a research by Konica Minolta. 2 Based on calculation for 7.4 × 7.4 cm panel size. As the world moves toward a genuine low-carbon society, there is a business opportunity in the lighting sector with energy-saving devices that exceed the capabilities of existing lighting. Looking ten years ahead, we are working to develop and commercialize Organic Light Emitting Diode (OLED) lighting. In fiscal 2013, we succeeded in increasing the luminous efficiency, a major challenge for achieving broader application of the technology, to 131 lm/W, which is better than general LED lighting and is the world’s highest luminous efficiency for an OLED.¹ As OLEDs do not use mercury like fluorescent lights, their environmental impact is low. In addition, we have leveraged our proprietary technical capabilities to develop thin and flexible OLED lighting panels. The super-thin, super-light and bendable panels are easy to implement in innovative designs traditional lighting has never realized. We anticipate there is a strong demand, including building/interior materials and autos, for those unique features that work as our advantage. We have invested about 10 billion yen to build the world’s first mass production plant for the flexible type, adopting the highly productive roll-to-roll processing, and plan to start production this fall. The plant has a capacity to manufacture one million panels² per month. Konica Minolta, Inc Sector profile Konica Minolta, Inc
30 In anticipation of increasing energy costs and possible carbon/energy taxes, Mosaic is committed to continuously working to improve our use of energy and lower our emissions. We have employed utility engineers at individual facilities to identify and execute energy efficiency projects including energy efficiency upgrades, cogeneration and the use of electricity generated by hydroelectric sources. The Mosaic Company Materials Sector analysis Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Chemicals Johnson Matthey LG Chem Syngenta International AG The Mosaic Company Construction materials Italcementi Metals and mining ACERINOX Anglo American Platinum Harmony Gold Mining Co Ltd Teck Resources Limited Paper and forest products Holmen UPM-Kymmene Corporation 417,668 7,118,320 1,127,000 4,410,252 30,762,715 378,493 5,935,532 2,742,440 3,089,147 289,000 7,310,000 25 384 77 489 5,468 72 1,089 1,520 339 116 547 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. 64 M 19 M 0.1 M 0.2 M 0.07 M 28 M 4 M 22 M 11 M 4 M Energy efficiency: processes Transportation: fleet Low carbon energy purchase Process emissions reductions Low carbon energy installation Investment required $101 M Annual monetary savings $53 M Annual CO²e savings 0.4 Mt CO²e Of the 11 materials companies making the CPLI this year, only three are returning performers. Such a high proportion of new leaders is encouraging. It shows that reporting and taking action on climate change have been stepped up within this sector.  As with some other sectors, no company has set a target beyond 2020 for either absolute or intensity reductions. There is room for the sector to be bolder and look further ahead, and perhaps to take part in CDP’s science based targets project as a means of positive differentiation. All of the leading materials companies engage with suppliers to identify emissions reduction opportunities and to innovate new products. Collectively, this group reduced its absolute emissions by 2.7 Mt CO²e in the last reporting year. Many of the most frequently reported short-term risks lie in the physical and regulatory areas. Such risks are primarily focussed on uncertainty around future regulation, the impact of carbon taxes, cap and trade schemes and air pollution limits. Difficulty of operating under extreme weather conditions or with reduced water availability are also often cited risks. Conversely, a number of companies noted that many of the long-term opportunities to increase their business could result from those same disrupted and extreme weather patterns. New shipping routes or areas of land previously inaccessible may be opened, or the need for chemical treatment of water or land contaminated as a result of flooding or other extreme weather events may increase. While these scenarios may be unpalatable to consider from an environmental perspective, the likelihood of them happening is rapidly increasing and these type of products will be required as part of the solution for humans to adapt to changing living conditions.  
31 Sector profile Johnson Matthey Johnson Matthey is a global speciality chemicals company and world leader in sustainable technologies. Listed on the FTSE 100, the company delivered £427 million profit in 2014. However, to us, good performance is not just about profit; it’s about running our business in the most sustainable way. We focus on developing high technology products that optimise the use of natural resources and enhance quality of life for millions of people around the world. Our catalyst technologies enable industrial customers to abate harmful emissions and operate their plants using minimum resources, whilst our recycling technologies ensure that valuable precious metals are conserved and reused. Forty years ago, Johnson Matthey pioneered the development of emission control catalysts for vehicles and, since their introduction, our products have destroyed many millions of tonnes of acid gases, cleaning up the air we breathe. And as we look to the future, we are developing fuel cell and battery technologies to reduce CO² emissions from the next generation of vehicles. Johnson Matthey
32 Telecommunication services Sector analysis Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Diversified telecommunication services Belgacom BT Group Koninklijke KPN NV (Royal KPN) KT Corporation Nippon Telegraph & Telephone Corporation (NTT) Orange Telefonica Telenor Group TeliaSonera Wireless telecommunication services Sprint Nextel Corporation 57,035 252,243 37,903 1,098,991 4,420,865 1,458,270 1,883,052 1,017,257 439,371 1,528,777 7 9 3 67 34 27 25 57 28 43 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. 445 M 82 M 0.5 Mt 0.14 Mt 0.07 Mt 28 M 3 M 70 M 15 M Energy efficiency: processes Low carbon energy installation Energy efficiency: building services Process emissions reductions Product design Investment required $538 M Annual monetary savings $117 M Annual CO²e savings 0.8 Mt CO²e Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Diversified telecommunication services Belgacom BT Group Koninklijke KPN NV (Royal KPN) KT Corporation Nippon Telegraph & Telephone Corporation (NTT) Orange Telefonica Telenor Group TeliaSonera Wireless telecommunication services Sprint Nextel Corporation 57,035 252,243 37,903 1,098,991 4,420,865 1,458,270 1,883,052 1,017,257 439,371 1,528,777 7 9 3 67 34 27 25 57 28 43 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. 445 M 82 M 0.5 Mt 0.14 Mt 0.07 Mt 28 M 3 M 70 M 15 M Energy efficiency: processes Low carbon energy installation Energy efficiency: building services Process emissions reductions Product design Investment required $538 M Annual monetary savings $117 M Annual CO²e savings 0.8 Mt CO²e All except two of the leaders in this sector are returning leaders, which shows those companies have managed to maintain momentum. All report engagement with their suppliers to identify reduction opportunities, enhance product innovation and use supplier scorecards in the procurement process. In reporting their Scope 3 emissions most are making good progress on assessing and calculating their upstream emissions, and there appears to be a consensus around which of the downstream categories are not relevant. These companies have particularly good results in the emission reduction activities invested in, with six of the ten companies citing reductions of more than 10%. BT Group and Royal KPN in particular have achieved very large reductions in their Scope 2 emissions over the last three years. Many companies reference the GESI Smarter2020 report and recommendations as informing their strategy and being consistent with their own corporate strategy. Across the whole suite of physical and regulatory risks and opportunities there is no clear stand out with most of the available categories getting at least one mention, but again it is clear that reputation and changing consumer behavior present the most reported risks and opportunities. As technology innovators these companies want to be seen as leading the way to a low carbon future by providing the tools for their customers to reduce emissions thus any perception of holding it back could be damaging.  Sustainability is more and more a mandatory component and a key differentiator in governmental tendering processes, driven by the EU directives. In general we see a rising customer awareness and demand to help them to reduce energy costs. As an ICT company we have and further develop the solutions to help other sectors on their journey to reduce carbon footprint and energy consumption. Belgacom
33 Sector profile BT Group At BT we use the power of communications to make a better world. As one of the world’s largest communications technology companies, we’re in a position to make a real difference. In June 2013 we launched our Net Good programme with a straightforward vision: To help our customers reduce emissions by at least three times the end-to-end carbon impact of our business. We’re proud of our achievements so far, which include developing and sharing our emission measurement methodology, identifying 15 ways in which our portfolio helps our customers avoid carbon emissions and reducing our operational carbon emissions by over 25%. We have also launched pilots for new and innovative carbon saving innovations such as MK Smart and we are advancing the Net Positive movement through the Net Positive Group and our Better Future Forum. Our people are also playing their part with 78% of employees involved in energy saving initiatives. Net Good is about real progress – for us, our partners and customers, for society and the planet. BT Group
34 Utilities Sector analysis Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Electric utilities ACCIONA S.A. EnBW Energie Baden-Württemberg AG Endesa Entergy Corporation Iberdrola SA Pepco Holdings, Inc. SSE VERBUND AG Gas utilities Gas Natural SDG SA Korea District Heating Corp. Multi utilities Centrica RWE AG 635,844 23,639,000 48,797,175 35,106,164 32,843,476 1,403,128 21,884,879 3,762,660 22,343,386 4,937,373 7,146,411 167,200,000 72 866 1,177 3,082 744 301 489 890 674 2,032 172 2,449 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. 7 B 9 M 144 M 1 Mt 19 Mt 0.6 Mt 79 M 69 M 5 B 3 B 689 M 524 M Low carbon energy installation Process emissions reductions Energy efficiency: building fabric Fugitive emissions reductions Energy efficiency: processes Investment required $16 B Annual monetary savings $301 M Annual CO²e savings 21 Mt CO²e Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Electric utilities ACCIONA S.A. EnBW Energie Baden-Württemberg AG Endesa Entergy Corporation Iberdrola SA Pepco Holdings, Inc. SSE VERBUND AG Gas utilities Gas Natural SDG SA Korea District Heating Corp. Multi utilities Centrica RWE AG 635,844 23,639,000 48,797,175 35,106,164 32,843,476 1,403,128 21,884,879 3,762,660 22,343,386 4,937,373 7,146,411 167,200,000 72 866 1,177 3,082 744 301 489 890 674 2,032 172 2,449 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. 7 B 9 M 144 M 1 Mt 19 Mt 0.6 Mt 79 M 69 M 5 B 3 B 689 M 524 M Low carbon energy installation Process emissions reductions Energy efficiency: building fabric Fugitive emissions reductions Energy efficiency: processes Investment required $16 B Annual monetary savings $301 M Annual CO²e savings 21 Mt CO²e This group of companies finds itself in a somewhat difficult position due to the nature of its business as energy providers. Many have been working hard to engage with their customers, promoting programs to encourage and incentivize less reliance on electricity. In fact it is the only sector that engages more with customers than with suppliers. When combined with a shift away from coal to renewables, this has enabled it to achieve reductions. SSE in particular reports a 24% increase in renewable generation and a 20% reduction in coal generation. While some of SSE’s reductions were as a result of reduced demand this is still a very positive step forward.  Though utilities leaders reported instances of risk from uncertainty around forthcoming regulation, and the impact of new cap and trade or carbon tax schemes, almost as many reported this as a potential opportunity either by leveling the playing field or allowing the growth of low carbon electricity generation. Companies who see this low carbon future as part of their strategy welcome new regulation since they are ahead of their peers who have not yet made the decision to invest in renewables in this way.   With regard to target setting special mention should go to Verbund who has committed to a 100% absolute reduction by 2050, that is to provide carbon neutral power supply.  Two other companies have absolute targets to 2020. Collectively, this group of companies accounts for the majority of the 33Mt CO²e reductions reported by the 2014 CPLI. A deep change in the generation mix, derived from the increase in fossil fuel prices and policies to support security of supply and reduced CO2 emissions, is taking place. IBERDROLA, as a wind power-leader, can face up to this situation due to the development of low carbon technologies and the ecoefficiency strategy… an investment has been established to achieve a renewable production of 40% among the total Group’s production. Iberdrola
35 Sector profile ACCIONA ACCIONA drives the transition towards a low-carbon economy. In 2013, the company avoided the emission of 15 million tonnes of CO² into the atmosphere, equivalent to 24 times the CO² generated in its production activities. ACCIONA is a global leader in renewable energy, infrastructure, water and services. With a history of over 100 years and operations in over 30 countries on five continents, the company is staunchly committed to sustainable development as the backbone of its business strategy. It develops and manages environmentally- and socially-responsible projects, producing only renewable energy, making advances in the area of water to alleviate the issue of water scarcity, and building efficient infrastructure. ACCIONA promotes the adoption of ambitious global targets for reducing emissions and energy consumption, leading the transition towards a low carbon economy. Since 2007, ACCIONA has reduced its CO² emissions by 63% and its energy consumption by 61%. ACCIONA
36 Building on climate change leadership The impacts of climate change, water stress and deforestation are today affecting people’s lives all over the world and if unchecked will cause devastation for generations to come.   Corporations, investors and governments must take responsibility to create the systemic change we need for an environmentally sustainable economy. For this reason we congratulate those companies that have achieved a position on CDP’s 2014 Climate Performance Leadership Index. All economic activity ultimately depends upon a steady flow of natural goods and services, such as fresh water, timber and food crops, or climate regulation and flood control. These goods and services can be considered the ‘income’ generated by the world’s natural capital, the assets upon which the global economy rests. However, as is becoming increasingly clear, we are eroding that natural capital base. Businesses and investors are paying increasing attention to the erosion of the world’s natural capital. By some estimates, the global economy is incurring unpriced natural capital costs of US$7.3 trillion/year, or 13% of global output. CDP has built a unique global system to drive transparency and accountability for business impacts across the earth’s natural capital, starting with climate, then moving into water and forest-risk commodities. Our programs are designed to help assess and manage corporate exposures to environmental risks and ultimately to set companies on the path to natural capital leadership. Deforestation and forest degradation accounts for approximately 15% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, the equivalent of the entire transport sector. Land use change for agriculture is the main driver of deforestation, with five agricultural commodities responsible for most deforestation globally: Timber, palm oil, soy, cattle and bio-fuels. CDP’s forests program provides the only unified system for disclosing corporate deforestation risk exposure and management information across these key commodities. Discover if you can help reduce your business risks and limit your contribution to deforestation at cdp.net/forests. Water security is one of the most tangible and fast-growing social, political and economic challenges faced today according to the World Economic Forum. CDP’s water program helps businesses to respond to this challenge, to measure and manage water-related risks in their direct operations and supply chains, and to attain a position of leadership by starting the journey to water stewardship. Find out more at cdp.net/water. Through CDP, major multinationals are using their purchasing power to achieve sustainable supply chains. Our 66 member companies who represent US$1.15 trillion in annual purchasing spend work with CDP. This enables them to implement successful supplier engagement strategies that reduce emissions, mitigate water and other environmental risks, and protect against escalating costs in supply chains. Join us at cdp.net/supplychain.
37 Appendix I Investor members CDP works with investors globally to advance the investment opportunities and reduce the risks posed by climate change by asking over 5,000 of the world’s largest companies to report their climate strategies, GHG emissions and energy use through CDP’s standardized format. To learn more about CDP’s member offering and becoming a member, please contact us or visit www.cdp.net/en-US/WhatWeDo/. Where are the signatory investors located?* Investors by typeCDP investor base continues to grow* CDP investor members 2014 ABRAPP – Associação Brasileira das Entidades Fechadas de Previdência Complementar AEGON N.V. ATP Group Aviva plc Aviva Investors AXA Group Bank of America Merrill Lynch Bendigo & Adelaide Bank Limited BlackRock Boston Common Asset Management, LLC BP Investment Management Limited California Public Employees’ Retirement System California State Teachers’ Retirement System Calvert Investment Management, Inc. Capricorn Investment Group, LLC Catholic Super CCLA Investment Management Ltd ClearBridge Investments DEXUS Property Group Fachesf Fapes Fundação Itaú Unibanco Generation Investment Management Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Henderson Global Investors HSBC Holdings plc Infraprev KLP Legg Mason Global Asset Management London Pensions Fund Authority Mobimo Holding AG Mongeral Aegon Seguros e Previdência S/A Morgan Stanley National Australia Bank Limited Neuberger Berman Nordea Investment Management Norges Bank Investment Management NEI Investments Petros PFA Pension Previ Real Grandeza Robeco RobecoSAM AG Rockefeller Asset Management, Sustainability & Impact Investing Group Royal Bank of Canada Royal Bank of Scotland Group Sampension KP Livsforsikring A/S Schroders Scottish Widows Investment Partnership SEB AB Serpros Sistel Sompo Japan Nipponkoa Holdings, Inc Standard Chartered TD Asset Management The Wellcome Trust 200 North America 70 Latin America & Caribbean 366 Europe 70 Asia 64 Australia & New Zealand 15 Africa 312 Asset managers 256 Asset owners 152 Banks 38 Insurance 27 Other ’13’12’11’10’09’08’07’06’05’04’03 8778 ’14 927164555741312110 4.5 CDP investor signatory assets in US$ trillions 722 767 655 551 534 475 385 315 225 155 95 35 CDP investor signatories * There were 767 investor signatories on 1st February 2014 when the official CDP climate change letter was sent to companies, however some investors joined after this date and are only reflected in the ‘geographical’ and ‘type’ breakdown.
38 Appendix II Largest non-responders by market capitalization¹ Company Country Consumer discretionary Amazon.com Inc. USA Comcast Corporation USA The Priceline Group Inc USA Rakuten,Inc. Japan Fast Retailing Co., Ltd. Japan Naspers South Africa Galaxy Entertainment Group Greater China Time Warner Cable Inc. USA Hermes International France Swatch Group Switzerland Discovery Communications, Inc. USA Dish Network Corp USA Luxottica Group Italy Wynn Macau Ltd USA Prada Italy Consumer staples Costco Wholesale Corporation USA Magnit Russia Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc. Canada Lorillard Inc. USA Tyson Foods, Inc. USA Monster Beverage Corporation USA Beam Inc USA Thai Beverage PCL Thailand Cencosud SA Chile Want Want China Holdings Ltd. Greater China Colruyt Belgium Church & Dwight Co., Inc USA Inner Mongolia Yili Industrial Group Greater China Yakult Honsha Co Ltd. Japan Kimberly-Clark de México S.A.B. de C.V. Mexico Energy Rosneft Russia Enterprise Products Partners L.P. USA Phillips 66 USA Reliance Industries India Oil & Natural Gas India Kinder Morgan Inc. USA National Oilwell Varco, Inc. USA RN Holding OAO Russia Coal India India Valero Energy Corporation USA Marathon Petroleum USA Williams Companies, Inc. USA Formosa Petrochemical Greater China Tenaris S.A. Luxembourg Company Country Financials Berkshire Hathaway USA Royal Bank of Canada Canada Sberbank Rossii Russia AIA Group Ltd. Greater China Investor AB Sweden Munich Re Germany Bank of China Greater China Cheung Kong Greater China Sun Hung Kai Properties Greater China DBS Group Holdings Singapore American Tower Corp. USA Sampo Oyj Finland Discover Financial Services USA United Overseas Bank Singapore Health care Gilead Sciences, Inc. USA Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. Canada McKesson Corporation USA Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. USA Alexion Pharmaceuticals USA HCA USA Perrigo Co. USA Sun Pharmaceutical Industries India St. Jude Medical, Inc. USA Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc USA Mylan Inc. USA Zoetis Inc USA Otsuka Holdings Co., Ltd. Japan AmerisourceBergen Corp. USA Forest Laboratories, Inc. USA Industrials Hutchison Whampoa Greater China Caterpillar Inc. USA Precision Castparts Corp. USA Jardine Strategic Greater China Jardine Matheson Greater China Air China Limited Greater China General Dynamics Corporation USA Shanghai International Airport Greater China SMC Corporation Japan Schindler Holding AG Switzerland Nielsen Holdings USA China Eastern Airlines Co., Ltd. Greater China China COSCO Holdings Greater China Bolloré France Pentair, Inc. USA 1. Market capitalization data sourced from Bloomberg. For purposes of this table the term ‘non-responders’ includes companies classified as ‘no response,’ ‘declined to participate,’ and ‘provided information’ and companies that registered to respond but never actually submitted.
39 Company Country Information technology Tencent Holdings Greater China Facebook USA Baidu Inc Greater China ASML Holding Netherlands Keyence Corporation Japan Naver South Korea LinkedIn Corp. USA Nintendo Co., Ltd. Japan MediaTek Greater China Paychex, Inc. USA GungHo Online Entertainment, Inc. Japan Activision Blizzard USA Yandex NV Netherlands Amphenol Corporation USA Avago Technologies USA Materials LyondellBasell Industries Cl A Netherlands MMC Norilsk Nickel OSJC Russia Grupo Mexico S.A.B. de CV Mexico Southern Copper Corporation Peru Nucor Corporation USA CF Industries Holdings, Inc. USA Formosa Plastics Corp Greater China Nan Ya Plastics Greater China Gerdau S/A Brazil Formosa Chemicals & Fibre Corporation Greater China Novolipetsk Steel OJSC Russia Novolipetskii Metallurgicheski Kombinat (NLMK) Russia Polyus Gold Russia FMC Corp USA NMDC India Company Country Telecommunication services SoftBank Corporation Japan America Movil Mexico T Mobile USA inc USA Crown Castle International Corp USA VimpelCom Ltd Netherlands Mobile TeleSystems OJSC Russia Bharti Airtel India MegaFon OAO Russia AFK Sistema JFSC Russia Tele2 AB Sweden Iliad France Axiata Group Berhad Malaysia Embratel Participacoes SA Brazil TÜRK TELEKOMÜNİKASYON A.Ş. Turkey Rostelecom Russia Utilities Dominion Resources, Inc. USA NextEra Energy, Inc. USA The Southern Company USA Hong Kong & China Gas Company Limited Greater China PPL Corporation USA NTPC Ltd India Canadian Utilities Canada Saudi Electricity Saudi Arabia Public Service Enterprise Group Inc. USA PNE WIND AG Germany Edison International USA CEZ Czech Republic FirstEnergy Corporation USA The Kansai Electric Power Co., Inc. Japan Power Assets Holdings Limited Greater China
40 767financial institutions with assets of US$92 trillion were signatories to the CDP 2014 climate change information request dated February 1, 2014. 3Sisters Sustainable Management LLC Aberdeen Asset Managers Aberdeen Immobilien KAG mbH ABRAPP—Associação Brasileira das Entidades Fechadas de Previdência Complementar Achmea NV Active Earth Investment Management Acuity Investment Management Addenda Capital Inc. Advanced Investment Partners AEGON N.V. AEGON-INDUSTRIAL Fund Management Co., Ltd AIG Asset Management AK Asset Management Inc. Akbank T.A.Ş. Alberta Investment Management Corporation (AIMCo) Alberta Teachers Retirement Fund Board Alcyone Finance AllenbridgeEpic Investment Advisers Limited Alliance Trust PLC Allianz Elementar Versicherungs-AG Allianz Global Investors Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH Allianz Group Altira Group Amalgamated Bank Amlin plc AMP Capital Investors AmpegaGerling Investment GmbH Amundi AM ANBIMA—Associação Brasileira das Entidades dos Mercados Financeiro e de Capitais Antera Gestão de Recursos S.A. APG Appleseed Fund AQEX LLC Aquila Capital Arisaig Partners Asia Pte Ltd Arjuna Capital Arkx Investment Management Arma Portföy Yönetimi A.Ş. Armstrong Asset Management As You Sow ASM Administradora de Recursos S.A. Appendix III Investor signatories ASN Bank Assicurazioni Generali Spa ATI Asset Management Atlantic Asset Management Pty Ltd ATP Group Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Australian Ethical Investment AustralianSuper Avaron Asset Management AS Aviva Investors Aviva plc AXA Group BAE Systems Pension Funds Investment Management Ltd Baillie Gifford & Co. BaltCap Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena Group Banco Bradesco S/A Banco Comercial Português S.A. Banco de Credito del Peru BCP Banco de Galicia y Buenos Aires S.A. Banco do Brasil Previdência Banco do Brasil S/A Banco Espírito Santo, SA Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social—BNDES Banco Popular Español Banco Sabadell, S.A. Banco Santander Banesprev—Fundo Banespa de Seguridade Social Banesto Banif, SA Bank Handlowy w Warszawie S.A. Bank Leumi Le Israel Bank of America Merrill Lynch Bank of Montreal Bank Vontobel AG Bankhaus Schelhammer & Schattera Kapitalanlagegesellschaft m.b.H. BANKIA S.A. Bankinter bankmecu Banque Degroof Banque Libano-Française Barclays Basellandschaftliche Kantonalbank BASF Sociedade de Previdência Complementar Basler Kantonalbank Bâtirente Baumann and Partners S.A. Bayern LB BayernInvest Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH BBC Pension Trust Ltd. BBVA BC Investment Management Corporation Bedfordshire Pension Fund Beetle Capital BEFIMMO SA Bendigo & Adelaide Bank Limited Bentall Kennedy Berenberg Bank Berti Investments BioFinance Administração de Recursos de Terceiros Ltda BlackRock Blom Bank SAL Blumenthal Foundation BNP Paribas Investment Partners BNY Mellon BNY Mellon Service Kapitalanlage Gesellschaft Boardwalk Capital Management Boston Common Asset Management, LLC BP Investment Management Limited Brasilprev Seguros e Previdência S/A. Breckenridge Capital Advisors British Airways Pension Investment Management Limited British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme Brown Advisory BSW Wealth Partners BT Financial Group BT Investment Management Busan Bank CAAT Pension Plan Cadiz Holdings Limited CAI Corporate Assets International AG Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec Caisse des Dépôts Caixa de Previdência dos Funcionários do Banco do Nordeste do Brasil (CAPEF) Caixa Econômica Federal Caixa Geral de Depósitos CaixaBank, S.A California Public Employees’ Retirement System California State Teachers’ Retirement System California State Treasurer Calvert Investment Management, Inc. Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) Canadian Labour Congress Staff Pension Fund CAPESESP Capital Innovations, LLC Capricorn Investment Group, LLC CareSuper Carmignac Gestion CASER PENSIONES Cathay Financial Holding Catherine Donnelly Foundation Catholic Super CBF Church of England Funds CBRE Cbus Superannuation Fund CCLA Investment Management Ltd Cedrus Asset Management Celeste Funds Management Limited Central Finance Board of the Methodist Church Ceres CERES—Fundação de Seguridade Social
41 Appendix III Investor signatories Challenger Change Investment Management Christian Brothers Investment Services Christian Super Christopher Reynolds Foundation Church Commissioners for England Church of England Pensions Board CI Mutual Funds’ Signature Global Advisors City Developments Limited Clean Yield Asset Management ClearBridge Investments Climate Change Capital Group Ltd CM-CIC Asset Management Colonial First State Global Asset Management Limited Comerica Incorporated COMGEST Commerzbank AG CommInsure Commonwealth Bank of Australia Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation Compton Foundation Concordia Versicherungs-Gesellschaft a.G. Confluence Capital Management LLC Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds Conser Invest Co-operative Financial Services (CFS) Crayna Capital, LLC. Credit Agricole Credit Suisse CTBC Financial Holding Co., Ltd. Daesung Capital Management Daiwa Asset Management Co. Ltd. Daiwa Securities Group Inc. Dalton Nicol Reid Dana Investment Advisors Danske Bank Group de Pury Pictet Turrettini & Cie S.A. DekaBank Deutsche Girozentrale Delta Lloyd Asset Management Demeter Partners Desjardins Group Deutsche Asset Management Investmentgesellschaft mbH Deutsche Bank AG Deutsche Postbank AG Development Bank of Japan Inc. Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) Dexia Asset Management DEXUS Property Group DGB Financial Group DIP DLM INVISTA ASSET MANAGEMENT S/A DNB ASA Domini Social Investments LLC Dongbu Insurance Doughty Hanson & Co. DWS Investment GmbH DZ Bank E.Sun Financial Holding Co Earth Capital Partners LLP East Capital AB East Sussex Pension Fund Ecclesiastical Investment Management Ltd. Ecofi Investissements—Groupe Credit Cooperatif Edward W. Hazen Foundation EEA Group Ltd Eika Kapitalforvaltning AS Eko Elan Capital Partners Element Investment Managers ELETRA—Fundação Celg de Seguros e Previdência Environment Agency Active Pension fund Environmental Investment Services Asia Limited Epworth Investment Management Equilibrium Capital Group equinet Bank AG Erik Penser Fondkommission Erste Asset Management Erste Group Bank Essex Investment Management Company, LLC ESSSuper Ethos Foundation Etica Sgr Eureka Funds Management Eurizon Capital SGR Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada Pension Plan for Clergy and Lay Workers Evangelical Lutheran Foundation of Eastern Canada Evangelisch-Luth. Kirche in Bayern Evli Bank Plc F&C Investments FACEB—FUNDAÇÃO DE PREVIDÊNCIA DOS EMPREGADOS DA CEB FAELCE—Fundacao Coelce de Seguridade Social FAPERS- Fundação Assistencial e Previdenciária da Extensão Rural do Rio Grande do Sul FASERN—Fundação COSERN de Previdência Complementar Federal Finance Fédéris Gestion d’Actifs FIDURA Capital Consult GmbH FIM Asset Management Ltd FIM Services Finance S.A. Financiere de l’Echiquier FIPECq—Fundação de Previdência Complementar dos Empregados e Servidores da FINEP, do IPEA, do CNPq FIRA.—Banco de Mexico First Affirmative Financial Network First Bank First State Investments First State Super First Swedish National Pension Fund (AP1) Firstrand Group Limited Five Oceans Asset Management Folketrygdfondet Folksam Fondaction CSN Fondation de Luxembourg Fondazione Cariplo Fondo Pensione Gruppo Intesa Sanpaolo— FAPA Fonds de Réserve pour les Retraites—FRR Forluz—Fundação Forluminas de Seguridade Social—FORLUZ Forma Futura Invest AG Fourth Swedish National Pension Fund, (AP4) FRANKFURT-TRUST Investment- Gesellschaft mbH Friends Fiduciary Corporation Fubon Financial Holdings Fukoku Capital Management Inc FUNCEF—Fundação dos Economiários Federais Fundação AMPLA de Seguridade Social— Brasiletros Fundação Atlântico de Seguridade Social Fundação Attilio Francisco Xavier Fontana Fundação Banrisul de Seguridade Social Fundação BRDE de Previdência Complementar—ISBRE Fundação Chesf de Assistência e Seguridade Social—Fachesf Fundação Corsan—dos Funcionários da Companhia Riograndense de Saneamento Fundação de Assistência e Previdência Social do BNDES—FAPES FUNDAÇÃO ELETROBRÁS DE SEGURIDADE SOCIAL—ELETROS Fundação Itaipu BR—de Previdência e Assistência Social FUNDAÇÃO ITAUBANCO Fundação Itaúsa Industrial Fundação Promon de Previdência Social Fundação Rede Ferroviaria de Seguridade Social—Refer FUNDAÇÃO SANEPAR DE PREVIDÊNCIA E ASSISTÊNCIA SOCIAL—FUSAN Fundação Sistel de Seguridade Social (Sistel) Fundação Vale do Rio Doce de Seguridade Social—VALIA FUNDIÁGUA—FUNDAÇÃO DE PREVIDENCIA COMPLEMENTAR DA CAESB Futuregrowth Asset Management GameChange Capital LLC Garanti Bank GEAP Fundação de Seguridade Social Gemway Assets General Equity Group AG Generali Deutschland Holding AG Generation Investment Management Genus Capital Management German Equity Trust AG Gjensidige Forsikring ASA Global Forestry Capital SARL Globalance Bank Ltd GLS Gemeinschaftsbank eG Goldman Sachs Group Inc. GOOD GROWTH INSTITUT für globale Vermögensentwicklung mbH Good Super
42 Governance for Owners Government Employees Pension Fund (“GEPF”), Republic of South Africa GPT Group Greater Manchester Pension Fund Green Cay Asset Management Green Century Capital Management GROUPAMA EMEKLİLİK A.Ş. GROUPAMA SİGORTA A.Ş. Groupe Crédit Coopératif Groupe Investissement Responsable Inc. GROUPE OFI AM Grupo Financiero Banorte SAB de CV Grupo Santander Brasil Gruppo Bancario Credito Valtellinese Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation Hang Seng Bank Hanwha Asset Management Company Harbour Asset Management Harrington Investments, Inc Harvard Management Company, Inc. Hauck & Aufhäuser Asset Management GmbH Hazel Capital LLP HDFC Bank Ltd. Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP) Heart of England Baptist Association Helaba Invest Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH Henderson Global Investors Hermes Fund Managers—BUT Hermes EOS for Carbon Action HESTA Super HIP Investor Holden & Partners HSBC Global Asset Management (Deutschland) GmbH HSBC Holdings plc HSBC INKA Internationale Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH HUMANIS Hyundai Marine & Fire Insurance Co., Ltd Hyundai Securities Co., Ltd. IBK Securities IDBI Bank Ltd. Illinois State Board of Investment Ilmarinen Mutual Pension Insurance Company Imofundos, S.A Impax Asset Management IndusInd Bank Ltd. Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc. Industrial Bank (A) Industrial Bank of Korea Industrial Development Corporation Industry Funds Management Inflection Point Capital Management Inflection Point Partners Infrastructure Development Finance Company ING Group N.V. Insight Investment Management (Global) Ltd Instituto Infraero de Seguridade Social— INFRAPREV Instituto Sebrae De Seguridade Social— SEBRAEPREV Insurance Australia Group Integre Wealth Management of Raymond James Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility IntReal KAG Investec Asset Management Investing for Good CIC Ltd Investor Environmental Health Network Irish Life Investment Managers Itau Asset Management Itaú Unibanco Holding S A Janus Capital Group Inc. Jarislowsky Fraser Limited Jessie Smith Noyes Foundation Jesuits in Britain JMEPS Trustees Limited JOHNSON & JOHNSON SOCIEDADE PREVIDENCIARIA JPMorgan Chase & Co. Jubitz Family Foundation Jupiter Asset Management Kagiso Asset Management Kaiser Ritter Partner Privatbank AG KB Kookmin Bank KBC Asset Management KBC Group KCPS Private Wealth Management KDB Asset Management Co. Ltd KDB Daewoo Securities Kendall Sustainable Infrastructure, LLC Kepler Cheuvreux KEPLER-FONDS KAG Keva KeyCorp KfW Bankengruppe Killik & Co LLP Kiwi Income Property Trust Kleinwort Benson Investors KlimaINVEST KLP Korea Investment Management Co., Ltd. Korea Technology Finance Corporation (KOTEC) KPA Pension La Banque Postale Asset Management La Financière Responsable La Francaise AM Lampe Asset Management GmbH Landsorganisationen i Sverige LaSalle Investment Management LBBW—Landesbank Baden-Württemberg LBBW Asset Management Investmentgesellschaft mbH LD Lønmodtagernes Dyrtidsfond Legal and General Investment Management Legg Mason Global Asset Management LGT Group LGT Group Foundation LIG Insurance Light Green Advisors, LLC Living Planet Fund Management Company S.A. Lloyds Banking Group Local Authority Pension Fund Forum Local Government Super Logos portföy Yönetimi A.Ş. London Pensions Fund Authority Lothian Pension Fund LUCRF Super Lutheran Council of Great Britain Macquarie Group Limited MagNet Magyar Közösségi Bank Zrt. MainFirst Bank AG Making Dreams a Reality Financial Planning Malakoff Médéric MAMA Sustainable Incubation AG Man Mandarine Gestion MAPFRE Maple-Brown Abbott Marc J. Lane Investment Management, Inc. Maryknoll Sisters Maryland State Treasurer Matrix Asset Management MATRIX GROUP LTD McLean Budden MEAG MUNICH ERGO AssetManagement GmbH Mediobanca Meeschaert Gestion Privée Meiji Yasuda Life Insurance Company Mendesprev Sociedade Previdenciária Merck Family Fund Mercy Investment Services, Inc. Mergence Investment Managers MetallRente GmbH Metrus—Instituto de Seguridade Social Metzler Asset Management Gmbh MFS Investment Management Midas International Asset Management, Ltd. Miller/Howard Investments, Inc. Mirae Asset Global Investments Mirae Asset Securities Co., Ltd. Mirova Mirvac Group Ltd Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate Mistra, Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co.,Ltd Mizuho Financial Group, Inc. MN Mobimo Holding AG Momentum Manager of Managers (Pty) Limited Momentum Manager of Managers (Pty) Ltd Monega Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH Mongeral Aegon Seguros e Previdência S/A Morgan Stanley Mountain Cleantech AG MTAA Superannuation Fund Munich Re Appendix III Investor signatories
43 Mutual Insurance Company Pension-Fennia Nanuk Asset Management Natcan Investment Management Nathan Cummings Foundation, The National Australia Bank Limited National Bank of Canada NATIONAL BANK OF GREECE S.A. National Grid Electricity Group of the Electricity Supply Pension Scheme National Grid UK Pension Scheme National Pensions Reserve Fund of Ireland National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) Nativus Sustainable Investments NATIXIS Natural Investments LLC Nedbank Limited Needmor Fund NEI Investments Nelson Capital Management, LLC Nest Sammelstiftung Neuberger Berman New Alternatives Fund Inc. New Amsterdam Partners LLC New Forests New Mexico State Treasurer New Resource Bank New York City Employees Retirement System New York City Teachers Retirement System New York State Common Retirement Fund (NYSCRF) Newground Social Investment Newton Investment Management Limited NGS Super NH-CA Asset Management Company Nikko Asset Management Co., Ltd. Nipponkoa Insurance Company, Ltd Nissay Asset Management Corporation NORD/LB Kapitalanlagegesellschaft AG Nordea Investment Management Norfolk Pension Fund Norges Bank Investment Management North Carolina Retirement System Northern Ireland Local Government Officers’ Superannuation Committee (NILGOSC) NORTHERN STAR GROUP Northern Trust NorthStar Asset Management, Inc Northward Capital Pty Ltd Nykredit OceanRock Investments Oddo & Cie oeco capital Lebensversicherung AG ÖKOWORLD Old Mutual plc OMERS Administration Corporation Ontario Pension Board Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan OP Fund Management Company Ltd Oppenheim & Co. Limited Oppenheim Fonds Trust GmbH Opplysningsvesenets fond (The Norwegian Church Endowment) OPTrust Oregon State Treasurer Orion Energy Systems Osmosis Investment Management Panahpur Park Foundation Parnassus Investments Pax World Funds Pensioenfonds Vervoer Pension Denmark Pension Fund for Danish Lawyers and Economists Pension Protection Fund People’s Choice Credit Union Perpetual PETROS—The Fundação Petrobras de Seguridade Social PFA Pension PGGM Vermogensbeheer Phillips, Hager & North Investment Management PhiTrust Active Investors Pictet Asset Management SA Pinstripe Management GmbH Pioneer Investments PIRAEUS BANK PKA Pluris Sustainable Investments SA PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. Pohjola Asset Management Ltd Polden-Puckham Charitable Foundation Portfolio 21 Porto Seguro S.A. POSTALIS—Instituto de Seguridade Social dos Correios e Telégrafos Power Finance Corporation Limited PREVHAB PREVIDÊNCIA COMPLEMENTAR PREVI Caixa de Previdência dos Funcionários do Banco do Brasil PREVIG Sociedade de Previdência Complementar Prius Partners Progressive Asset Management, Inc. Prologis Provinzial Rheinland Holding Prudential Investment Management Prudential Plc Psagot Investment House Ltd Public Sector Pension Investment Board Q Capital Partners Co. Ltd QBE Insurance Group Quilter Cheviot Asset Management Quotient Investors Rabobank Raiffeisen Fund Management Hungary Ltd. Raiffeisen Kapitalanlage-Gesellschaft m.b.H. Raiffeisen Schweiz Genossenschaft Rathbones / Rathbone Greenbank Investments RCM (Allianz Global Investors) Real Grandeza Fundação de Previdência e Assistência Social REI Super Appendix III Investor signatories Reliance Capital Limited Representative Body of the Church in Wales Resolution Resona Bank, Limited Reynders McVeigh Capital Management River Twice Capital Advisors, LLC Robeco RobecoSAM AG Robert & Patricia Switzer Foundation Rockefeller Asset Management, Sustainability & Impact Investing Group Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment Rothschild & Cie Gestion Group Royal Bank of Canada Royal Bank of Scotland Group Royal London Asset Management RPMI Railpen Investments RREEF Investment GmbH Russell Investments Sampension KP Livsforsikring A/S Samsung Asset Management Co., Ltd. Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Co.,Ltd., Samsung Securities Samsunglife Insurance Sanlam Life Insurance Ltd Santa Fé Portfolios Ltda Santam Sarasin & Cie AG Sarasin & Partners SAS Trustee Corporation Sauren Finanzdienstleistungen GmbH & Co. KG Schroders Scotiabank Scottish Widows Investment Partnership SEB Second Swedish National Pension Fund (AP2) Şekerbank T.A.Ş. Seligson & Co Fund Management Plc Sentinel Investments SERPROS—Fundo Multipatrocinado Service Employees International Union Pension Fund Servite Friars Seventh Swedish National Pension Fund (AP7) Shinhan Bank Shinhan BNP Paribas Investment Trust Management Co., Ltd Shinkin Asset Management Co., Ltd Siemens Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH Signet Capital Management Ltd Sisters of St Francis of Philadelphia Sisters of St. Dominic Skandia Smith Pierce, LLC SNS Asset Management Social(k) Sociedade de Previdencia Complementar da Dataprev—Prevdata Società reale mutua di assicurazioni Socrates Fund Management
44 Appendix III Investor signatories Solaris Investment Management Limited Sompo Japan Nipponkoa Holdings, Inc Sonen Capital Sopher Investment Management Soprise! Impact Fund SouthPeak Investment Management SPF Beheer bv Spring Water Asset Management Sprucegrove Investment Management Ltd Standard Chartered Standard Chartered Korea Limited Standard Life Investments Standish Mellon Asset Management State Bank of India State Board of Administration (SBA) of Florida State Street Corporation StatewideSuper Stockland Storebrand ASA Strathclyde Pension Fund Stratus Group Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Holdings, Inc. Sun Life Financial Superfund Asset Management GmbH SURA Peru (AFP Integra, Seguros SURA, Fondos SURA, Hipotecaria SURA) SUSI Partners AG Sustainable Capital Sustainable Development Capital Sustainable Insight Capital Management Svenska kyrkan Svenska kyrkans pensionskassa Swedbank AB Swedish Pensions Agency Swift Foundation Swiss Re Swisscanto Asset Management AG Sycomore Asset Management Syntrus Achmea Asset Management T. Rowe Price T. SINAİ KALKINMA BANKASI A.Ş. Tata Capital Limited TD Asset Management (TD Asset Management Inc. and TDAM USA Inc.) Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association—College Retirement Equities Fund Telluride Association Telstra Super Tempis Asset Management Co. Ltd Terra Global Capital, LLC TerraVerde Capital Management LLC TfL Pension Fund The ASB Community Trust The Brainerd Foundation The Bullitt Foundation The Central Church Fund of Finland The Children’s Investment Fund Management (UK) LLP The Collins Foundation The Co-operative Asset Management The Co-operators Group Ltd The Council of Lutheran Churches The Daly Foundation The Environmental Investment Partnership LLP The Hartford Financial Services Group The Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust The Korea Teachers Pension (KTP) The New School The Oppenheimer Group The Pension Plan For Employees of the Public Service Alliance of Canada The Pinch Group The Presbyterian Church in Canada The Russell Family Foundation The Sandy River Charitable Foundation The Shiga Bank, Ltd. The Sisters of St. Ann The Sustainability Group at the Loring, Wolcott & Coolidge Office The United Church of Canada—General Council The University of Edinburgh Endowment Fund The Wellcome Trust Third Swedish National Pension Fund (AP3) Threadneedle Asset Management TOBAM Tokio Marine Holdings, Inc Toronto Atmospheric Fund Trillium Asset Management, LLC Triodos Investment Management Tri-State Coalition for Responsible Investment Trust Waikato Trusteam Finance Trustees of Donations to the Protestant Episcopal Church Tryg Turner Investments UBS UniCredit SpA Union Asset Management Holding AG Union Investment Privatfonds GmbH Unione di Banche Italiane S.c.p.a. Unionen Unipension Fondsmaeglerselskab A/S UNISONS Staff Pension Scheme UniSuper Unitarian Universalist Association United Church Funds United Nations Foundation Unity College Unity Trust Bank Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS) Van Lanschot Vancity Group of Companies VCH Vermögensverwaltung AG Ventas, Inc. Veris Wealth Partners Veritas Investment Trust GmbH Vermont State Treasurer Vexiom Capital Group, Inc. VicSuper Victorian Funds Management Corporation VietNam Holding Ltd. Vinva Investment Management VOIGT & COLL. GMBH VOLKSBANK INVESTMENTS Walden Asset Management WARBURG—HENDERSON Kapitalanlagegesellschaft für Immobilien mbH WARBURG INVEST KAPITALANLAGEGESELLSCHAFT MBH Water Asset Management, LLC Wells Fargo & Company Wespath Investment Management West Midlands Pension Fund West Yorkshire Pension Fund Westfield Capital Management Company, LP WestLB Mellon Asset Management (WMAM) Westpac Banking Corporation WHEB Asset Management White Owl Capital AG Wisconsin, Iowa, & Minnesota Coalition for Responsible Investment Woori Bank Woori Investment & Securities Co., Ltd. YES BANK Ltd. York University Pension Fund Youville Provident Fund Inc. Zegora Investment Management Zevin Asset Management, LLC Zürcher Kantonalbank
CDP Contacts Paul Dickinson Executive Chairman Paul Simpson Chief Executive Officer Frances Way Co-Chief Operating Officer Sue Howells Co-Chief Operating Officer Marcus Norton Chief Partnerships Officer Daniel Turner Head of Disclosure James Hulse Head of Investor Initiatives CDP Head Office 40 Bowling Green Lane London EC1R 0NE United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)20 7970 5660 @cdp www.cdp.net info@cdp.net CDP Board of Trustees Chairman: Alan Brown Wellcome Trust James Cameron Climate Change Capital & ODI Ben Goldsmith WHEB Chris Page Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Jeremy Smith Takejiro Sueyoshi Tessa Tennant Martin Wise Relationship Capital Partners CDP Advisors Lord Adair Turner Rear Admiral Neil Morisetti CB Global Implementation Partner Design thestellardesign.com stellar design stellar Stellar Design information | graphics | truth stellar designvisualizing truth stellar desivisual truth stellar designvisualising truth stellar designvisualizing truth stellar designvisualizing truth stellar designvisualising truth stellar design For access to a database of public responses for analysis, benchmarking and learning best practices, please contact reporterservices@cdp.net. This report is available for download from www.cdp.net.

More Related Content

PDF
Climate Leadership 2014 - Report by The Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP)
byTurlough Guerin GAICD FGIA
 
PDF
CDP Global 500 Climate Change Report 2013
bySustainable Brands
 
PDF
#CDP Climate Action and Profitability
byAgustin del Castillo
 
PDF
CDP-global-climate-change-report-2015
byCynthia Huber
 
PDF
Energy & Sustainability Goal-Setting: A Guide To 7 Top Third Party Standards
byLeon Pulman
 
PDF
Cdp global-water-report-2013
bySustainable Brands
 
PDF
How are investors responding to the concept of carbon bubble and the impact o...
byDr. Prachi Ugle Pimpalkhute
 
PDF
Power Forward- Why the World's Largest Companies Are Investing in Renewable E...
byMark Molitor
 
Climate Leadership 2014 - Report by The Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP)
byTurlough Guerin GAICD FGIA
 
CDP Global 500 Climate Change Report 2013
bySustainable Brands
 
#CDP Climate Action and Profitability
byAgustin del Castillo
 
CDP-global-climate-change-report-2015
byCynthia Huber
 
Energy & Sustainability Goal-Setting: A Guide To 7 Top Third Party Standards
byLeon Pulman
 
Cdp global-water-report-2013
bySustainable Brands
 
How are investors responding to the concept of carbon bubble and the impact o...
byDr. Prachi Ugle Pimpalkhute
 
Power Forward- Why the World's Largest Companies Are Investing in Renewable E...
byMark Molitor
 

What's hot

PDF
Transitions Report 2020
byTurlough Guerin GAICD FGIA
 
PDF
CDP Global Supply Chain Report 2014: Collaborative Action on Climate Risk
bySustainable Brands
 
PDF
Corporate Use of Carbon Prices: Commentary from corporations, investors and t...
bySustainable Brands
 
PDF
How Transparency Drives Performance
bySustainable Brands
 
PDF
FedEx_2016_Global_Citizenship_Report_Single_Final
byDermot Murray
 
PDF
The Evolution of Aggregation and Reporting of ESG Data: Observations from a L...
bySustainable Brands
 
PDF
Environmental Business Journal - VERTEX Growth
byLisa Dehner
 
PDF
Key Facts & Figures in the Life Sciences Industry (Hi-Res)
byKumaraguru Veerasamy
 
PDF
State of green business 2013
byAlbert Hereu
 
PPT
Carbon Strategies in the U.S. 2001-2009
byCarlos Rymer
 
PPT
Presentation1 GE Appliances
by9855274090
 
Transitions Report 2020
byTurlough Guerin GAICD FGIA
 
CDP Global Supply Chain Report 2014: Collaborative Action on Climate Risk
bySustainable Brands
 
Corporate Use of Carbon Prices: Commentary from corporations, investors and t...
bySustainable Brands
 
How Transparency Drives Performance
bySustainable Brands
 
FedEx_2016_Global_Citizenship_Report_Single_Final
byDermot Murray
 
The Evolution of Aggregation and Reporting of ESG Data: Observations from a L...
bySustainable Brands
 
Environmental Business Journal - VERTEX Growth
byLisa Dehner
 
Key Facts & Figures in the Life Sciences Industry (Hi-Res)
byKumaraguru Veerasamy
 
State of green business 2013
byAlbert Hereu
 
Carbon Strategies in the U.S. 2001-2009
byCarlos Rymer
 
Presentation1 GE Appliances
by9855274090
 

Similar to A-LIST Global Climate Leaders - CDP 2014 report

PDF
Iberia 125 Climate Change Report 2013
byAna Cabrita
 
PDF
CDP S&P 500 Climate Change Report
bySustainable Brands
 
PPTX
CDP Progress & Challenges for Cities | Amanda Haworth
byicarb
 
PDF
Climate Change & Sustainability Reporting: Core to Business Solutions( Dr Ton...
byEMEX
 
PDF
Global Electric Utilities Climate Change Adaptation Acclimatise Report
byjohnfirth
 
PDF
Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Consumer and Technology Companies
byAndy Dabydeen
 
PPTX
CDP_Benefits_of_Disclosure_May_2023__(1).pptx
byAnas Nashrullah
 
PPT
climate
byGaurav
 
PDF
Sustainability goal setting guide to 7 top third party standards
byJackson Seng
 
PDF
CC_ReportingGuidance_Minimum_InvestmentCommunity_SupplyChain_03-04-2023_20-34...
byEduardoGarza66
 
PDF
Steven Tebbe: Leading business strategies for carbonneutrality
bySitra / Ekologinen kestävyys
 
PDF
The Business of Sustainable Supply Chains for Manufacturers
byWithum
 
PDF
Readiness of Indian Export Sector and Strategy to deal with Climate Change Po...
bymehtavd
 
PDF
Business case for carbon roadmap development - RSM GC
byPravin Jadhav
 
PDF
The Commodity Crunch: Value at Risk from Deforestation
bySustainable Brands
 
PDF
Cdp supply-chain-report-2015
bySustainable Brands
 
PDF
GHG Management Trends, Developments and Issues to Watch (CDP, 2013)
byStephen Donofrio
 
PDF
Guide responsible corporate_engagement_climate_policy
bySustainable Brands
 
PDF
Guide for Responsible Corporate Engagement in Climate Policy
bySustainable Brands
 
PDF
Carbon_Pricing_Leadership_2015
byJordan Hart, LEED Green Associate
 
Iberia 125 Climate Change Report 2013
byAna Cabrita
 
CDP S&P 500 Climate Change Report
bySustainable Brands
 
CDP Progress & Challenges for Cities | Amanda Haworth
byicarb
 
Climate Change & Sustainability Reporting: Core to Business Solutions( Dr Ton...
byEMEX
 
Global Electric Utilities Climate Change Adaptation Acclimatise Report
byjohnfirth
 
Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Consumer and Technology Companies
byAndy Dabydeen
 
CDP_Benefits_of_Disclosure_May_2023__(1).pptx
byAnas Nashrullah
 
climate
byGaurav
 
Sustainability goal setting guide to 7 top third party standards
byJackson Seng
 
CC_ReportingGuidance_Minimum_InvestmentCommunity_SupplyChain_03-04-2023_20-34...
byEduardoGarza66
 
Steven Tebbe: Leading business strategies for carbonneutrality
bySitra / Ekologinen kestävyys
 
The Business of Sustainable Supply Chains for Manufacturers
byWithum
 
Readiness of Indian Export Sector and Strategy to deal with Climate Change Po...
bymehtavd
 
Business case for carbon roadmap development - RSM GC
byPravin Jadhav
 
The Commodity Crunch: Value at Risk from Deforestation
bySustainable Brands
 
Cdp supply-chain-report-2015
bySustainable Brands
 
GHG Management Trends, Developments and Issues to Watch (CDP, 2013)
byStephen Donofrio
 
Guide responsible corporate_engagement_climate_policy
bySustainable Brands
 
Guide for Responsible Corporate Engagement in Climate Policy
bySustainable Brands
 
Carbon_Pricing_Leadership_2015
byJordan Hart, LEED Green Associate
 

A-LIST Global Climate Leaders - CDP 2014 report

  • 1.
    Report sponsor The AList The CDP Climate Performance Leadership Index 2014 On behalf of 767 investors with assets of US$92 trillion
  • 2.
    Aplicación sobre fondoblanco Aplicación en B/N Aplicación sobre color Aplicación en Merchandising sustainabl e Spain, Portugal and Latin America JapanJapan CDP’s global scoring and sustainability business process outsourcing (BPO) partner Australia & New Zealand, Benelux, Canada, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Nordic, SE Asia, United Kingdom, USA Germany and Austria Germany and Austria Germany and Austria Germany: Mittelstand Switzerland Japan Italy South Africa South Africa South Korea China, Japan, Russia, Turkey Brazil France ※PANTONE：コート紙を使用する場合にはPANTONE COATEDチップ、非コート紙の場合 にはPANTONE UNCOATEDチップを基準としてください。 Deloitte Blue 280 375基準色　 PANTONE DIC 近似色 Deloitte Green CMYK C100 M75 Y0 K13 C45 M0 Y93 K0 RGB R0 G39 B118 R146 G212 B0 255 F294 CDP 2014 scoring partners CDP works with a number of partners to deliver the scores for all our responding companies. These partners are listed below along with the geographical regions in which they provide the scoring. All scoring partners have to complete a detailed training course to ensure the methodology and guidance are applied correctly and the scoring results go through a comprehensive quality assurance process before being published. In some regions there is more than one scoring partner and the responsibilities are shared between multiple partners. PE International ACCIONA BT Group Our sincere thanks are also extended to the following for their generous support: CVS Health Daimler AG Elekta Konica Minolta, Inc Johnson Matthey Siemens Aktiengesellschaft
  • 3.
    03 Contents 04 CEO foreword 05 Sustainability datamakes business stronger Guest commentary: PE International 06 Climate Performance Leadership Index (CPLI) 08 What makes a climate change performance global leader? Executive summary 11 Leadership criteria 12 Where are the performance leaders? 14 Investor analysis: Climate change action and financial performance Important Notice The contents of this report may be used by anyone providing acknowledgement is given to CDP. This does not represent a license to repackage or resell any of the data reported to CDP or the contributing authors and presented in this report. If you intend to repackage or resell any of the contents of this report, you need to obtain express permission from CDP before doing so. CDP has prepared the data and analysis in this report based on responses to the 2014 climate change information request. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given by CDP or any of its contributors as to the accuracy or completeness of the information and opinions contained in this report. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. To the extent permitted by law, CDP and its contributors do not accept or assume any liability, responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this report or for any decision based on it. All information and views expressed herein by CDP and its contributors are based on their judgment 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. CDP and its contributors, their affiliated member firms or companies, or their respective shareholders, members, partners, principals, 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. ‘CDP’ refers to CDP Worldwide, a United Kingdom company limited by guarantee, registered as a United Kingdom charity number 1122330. © 2014 CDP Worldwide. All rights reserved. Measurement of emissions used throughout the report: 1 gigaton (Gt) CO ² e = 1,000,000,000 metric tons CO ² e 1 megaton (Mt) CO ² e = 1,000,000 metric tons CO ² e Cover photo: Shawn Pecor / Shutterstock.com Sector profiles 16 Consumer discretionary 18 Consumer staples 20 Energy 22 Financials 24 Health care 26 Industrials 28 Information technology 30 Materials 32 Telecommunication services 34 Utilities 36 Building on climate change leadership: Natural capital 37 Appendix I Investor members 38 Appendix II Largest non-responders by market capitalization 40 Appendix III Investor signatories
  • 4.
    04 CEO foreword The globaleconomy has bounced back from crisis and a cautious optimism is beginning to pervade the markets. As we embrace recovery we must remember that greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise and we face steep financial risk if we do not mitigate them. The unprecedented environmental challenges that we confront today – reducing greenhouse gas emissions, safeguarding water resources and preventing the destruction of forests – are also economic problems. One irrefutable fact is filtering through to companies and investors: the bottom line is at risk from environmental crisis. The impact of climate events on economies around the world has increasingly been splashed across headlines in the last year, with the worst winter in 30 years suffered by the USA costing billions of dollars. Australia has experienced its hottest two years on record and the UK has had its wettest winter for hundreds of years costing the insurance industry over a billion pounds. Over three quarters of companies reporting to CDP this year have disclosed a physical risk from climate change. Investing in climate change–related resilience planning has become crucial for all corporations. Investor engagement on these issues is increasing. In the US a record number of shareholder resolutions in the 2014 proxy season led 20 international corporations to commit to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or sustainably source palm oil. As mainstream investors begin to recognize the real value at risk, we are seeing more action from some of the 767 investors who request disclosure through CDP. The Norwegian pension fund, Norges Bank, with assets worth over $800 billion, expects companies to show strategies for climate change risk mitigation and water management, and have divested from both timber and palm oil companies that did not meet their standards. There is growing momentum on the policy front with President Obama’s announcement of new federal rules to limit greenhouse gases in the US. In the EU, some 6,000 companies will be required to disclose on specific environmental, social and governance criteria as part of their mainstream reporting to investors. In China over 20,000 companies will be required to report their greenhouse gas emissions to the government. There is a palpable sea change in approach by companies driven by a growing recognition that there is a cost associated with the carbon they emit. Measurement, transparency and accountability drives positive change in the world of business and investment. Our experience working with over 4,500 companies shows the multitude of benefits for companies that report their environmental impacts, unveiling risks and previously unseen opportunities. We are standing at a juncture in history. With the prospect of a global climate deal coming from the United Nations process, governments, cities, the private sector and civil society have a great opportunity to take bold actions and build momentum in the run up to the Paris 2015 meeting. The decisions we make today can lead us to a profitable and secure future. A future that we can all be proud of. Paul Simpson Chief Executive Officer, CDP One irrefutable fact is filtering through to companies and investors: the bottom line is at risk from environmental crisis. 1.  www.un.org/ climatechange/towards-a- climate-agreement/
  • 5.
    05 Sustainability data makesbusiness stronger Humanity is living beyond the planet’s ability to support us. We have to decouple economic growth from our use of resources and the first step to doing that is to know and monitor the impact of our activities. Thanks to the efforts of CDP, the amount and quality of data available to businesses has exploded. We now live in the age of “big data” and businesses have the ability to decode quickly and effectively the impact of the way they operate. This is a boon to companies and their stakeholders as they become increasingly concerned about issues ranging from greenhouse gas emissions and resource scarcity to labor conditions and conflict minerals – and their potential effects on business performance. Businesses, cities, government departments and municipalities need to know, now more than ever, what is going on within their own operations and throughout their value chains. However, there is a big difference between having the information available and being able to make good use of it. Trying to gather and use this data armed with little more than a clipboard and a spreadsheet is no longer feasible if organizations want to manage their sustainability reporting and extract the maximum value from it. They need system-wide software platforms that enable them to evaluate everything from a product carbon footprint to an enterprise-level sustainability strategy or supply chain program. And information, once collected, should not be trapped in the silos of different departments but should be used again and again to meet requests for greater transparency from stakeholders ranging from organisations such as CDP to investors, customers, employees and regulators. However, disclosure on its own is not enough. Sustainability leaders are using the wealth of data they now have available to define targets, identify opportunities, benchmark their performance, monitor and measure cost savings and communicate their progress. The integration of sustainability performance management into their operations enables businesses not just to map their sustainability landscape but also to navigate their way through it and scale up their efforts. Armed with the knowledge of the full impacts of their value chains and products, they can improve them or make entirely new products with sustainability designed into them. They can create innovative technologies and sell into new markets. And crucially, they can do this not just on an ad-hoc or one-off basis but they can scale up their sustainability performance throughout their organizations to create an ongoing competitive advantage. True leaders in the field are using their sustainability information to become stronger businesses and to make better decisions based on what they have learned. They understand that analyzing, reporting and benchmarking the data they have gathered can help to boost revenues, strengthen brands, cut costs and manage risks. We congratulate the companies recognised for their leadership in this report and are pleased to continue to accompany many of them on their journey. Christoph Wilfert CEO, PE International True leaders in the field are using their sustainability information to become stronger businesses and to make better decisions.
  • 6.
    06 2014 Climate PerformanceLeadership Index (CPLI) Years Company Country on CPLI Consumer discretionary ARÇELİK A.Ş † Turkey New BMW AG Germany  Daimler AG Germany  DIRECTV USA New Fiat Italy  General Motors Company USA New H&M Hennes & Mauritz AB Sweden  Johnson Controls USA New Kering France New LG Electronics South Korea  Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. Japan  Reed Elsevier Group United Kingdom  Renault France New Sekisui Chemical Co., Ltd. Japan  Tofaş Türk Otomobil Fabrikası A.Ş. Turkey New Toyota Motor Corporation Japan  Volkswagen AG Germany  Wyndham Worldwide Corporation USA New YOOX SpA Italy  Consumer staples Aeon Co., Ltd. Japan New Anheuser Busch InBev Belgium  Associated British Foods United Kingdom New Coca-Cola HBC AG Switzerland New CVS Health USA New Danone France New Diageo Plc United Kingdom  Heineken NV Netherlands New J Sainsbury Plc United Kingdom New Kirin Holdings Co Ltd Japan New L’Oreal France  Morrison Supermarkets United Kingdom New Oriflame Cosmetics AB Sweden New Philip Morris International USA  Pick ‘n Pay Stores Ltd South Africa  SABMiller United Kingdom New Shiseido Co., Ltd. Japan New Sonae Portugal  Suntory Beverage & Food Japan New Unilever plc United Kingdom  Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. USA New Energy Essar Oil India New S-Oil Corporation South Korea New Solstad Offshore Norway New Spectra Energy Corp USA  Financials Aviva United Kingdom New Banco Espirito Santo Portugal New Years Company Country on CPLI Banco Santander Spain New Bank of America Merrill Lynch USA  Bankia Spain New BNY Mellon USA  CaixaBank Spain  Comerica Incorporated USA  Commerzbank AG Germany New Commonwealth Bank of Australia Australia  Daiwa House Industry Co., Ltd. Japan New Dexus Property Group Australia  Firstrand Limited South Africa  Generali Deutschland Holding AG Germany  Goldman Sachs Group Inc. USA  Henderson Group Ireland New Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. USA  HSBC Holdings plc United Kingdom  ING Group Netherlands New Insurance Australia Group Australia  Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A Italy  Investa Office Fund Australia New National Australia Bank Australia  Principal Financial Group, Inc. USA  Raiffeisen Bank International AG Austria  Redefine Properties Ltd South Africa New Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance South Korea New Sanlam South Africa New Shinhan Financial Group South Korea  Simon Property Group USA New Standard Bank Group South Africa New Standard Chartered United Kingdom New TD Bank Group Canada  The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. USA  UBS Switzerland  Wells Fargo & Company USA  Zurich Insurance Group Switzerland New Health care AstraZeneca United Kingdom New Bayer AG Germany  Elekta Sweden New Lundbeck A/S Denmark New Mediclinic International South Africa New Novozymes A/S Denmark New Olympus Corporation Japan  Industrials Abengoa Spain  Balfour Beatty United Kingdom New Bombardier Inc. Canada New bpost Belgium New Canadian National Railway Company Canada New Carillion United Kingdom  CNH Industrial NV United Kingdom New
  • 7.
    07 Years Company Country onCPLI Cobham United Kingdom New CSX Corporation USA  Dai Nippon Printing Co., Ltd. Japan New Daikin Industries, Ltd. Japan New Dampskibsselskabet NORDEN A/S Denmark New Deutsche Bahn* Germany New Doosan Heavy Industries South Korea  & Construction Ferrovial † Spain  Finnair Finland New Flughafen München GmbH* Germany New Hyundai E&C South Korea  IHI Corporation Japan New Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. Japan New Komatsu Ltd. Japan  Larsen & Toubro India New Lockheed Martin Corporation USA  MAN SE Germany New Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd Japan New Northrop Grumman Corp USA  Royal BAM Group Netherlands New Royal Philips Netherlands  Samsung C&T South Korea  Schneider Electric France  SGS SA Switzerland  Shimizu Corporation Japan  Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Germany  Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. USA  Taisei Corporation Japan New Thales France New Toppan Printing Co., Ltd. Japan New Toshiba Corporation Japan  Toto Ltd. Japan New Information technology Accenture Ireland New Adobe Systems, Inc. USA  Akamai Technologies Inc USA New Amadeus IT Holding Spain New Apple Inc. USA New Atos SE France  Autodesk, Inc. USA  Cap Gemini France New Cisco Systems, Inc. USA  Delta Electronics Greater China New Ericsson Sweden New EVRY ASA Norway New Fujitsu Ltd. Japan  Google Inc. USA New Groupe Steria France  Hewlett-Packard USA  Hitachi, Ltd. Japan New Juniper Networks, Inc. USA New Years Company Country on CPLI Konica Minolta, Inc. Japan  Microsoft Corporation USA  Nokia Group Finland  Samsung Electro-Mechanics South Korea  Co., Ltd. Samsung Electronics South Korea  Samsung SDI South Korea  SAP AG Germany  SK Hynix South Korea  Tata Consultancy Services India  Tech Mahindra India New Vaisala Oyj Finland New Wipro India  Materials ACERINOX Spain New Anglo American Platinum South Africa New Harmony Gold Mining Co Ltd South Africa  Holmen Sweden  Israel Chemicals † Israel New Italcementi Italy New Johnson Matthey United Kingdom New LG Chem South Korea New Syngenta International AG Switzerland New Teck Resources Limited Canada New The Mosaic Company USA  UPM-Kymmene Corporation Finland New Telecommunication services Belgacom Belgium  BT Group United Kingdom  Elisa Oyj Finland New Koninklijke KPN NV (Royal KPN) Netherlands  KT Corporation South Korea  Nippon Telegraph Japan New & Telephone Corporation (NTT) Orange France  Sprint Nextel Corporation USA  Telefonica Spain  Telenor Group Norway  TeliaSonera Sweden New Utilities ACCIONA S.A. Spain  Centrica United Kingdom New EnBW Energie Baden-Württemberg AG Germany New Endesa Spain New Entergy Corporation USA  Gas Natural SDG SA Spain  Iberdrola Spain  Korea District Heating Corp. South Korea New Pepco Holdings, Inc. USA  RWE AG Germany New SSE United Kingdom  VERBUND AG Austria New  Indicates total number of years on CPLI from 2010 to 2014 inclusive Shaded areas indicate the companies that have been on CPLI every year since 2010. * CDP Mittelstand program, not included in report analysis. † Added after publication, not included in analysis.
  • 8.
    08 What makes aglobal climate performance leader? “The single biggest risk that exists to the economy today” is how former U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has categorized climate change. He believes that the factors that nearly brought down the U.S. financial sector have parallels with climate change. The global challenge Economies globally have broadly strengthened but levels of manmade greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere have been increasing at record pace and are expected to reach a 40 billion metric ton high this year. This suggests that market mechanisms and big business have so far failed to decouple economic from emissions growth. However, it seems that a tipping point has been reached. In September, more than 100 of the world’s political leaders gathered at the UN Secretary General’s landmark Climate Summit, with many making public commitments on climate change. China revealed greater determination for climate progress, for the first time announcing a goal to reduce its absolute carbon emissions. The corporate world is taking equally promising steps. Research has revealed that solar and wind farms now offer viable alternatives to coal-powered plants as energy sources.¹ There have been significant developments in a global divestment movement to reduce dependency on non-renewable energy. Rockefeller Brothers Fund, alongside other influential investors, has announced the intention to sell US$50 billion of fossil fuel investments, re-investing the proceeds in clean energy systems. Identifying the leaders The investors that request companies disclose their climate related risks and opportunities through CDP represent US$92 trillion, a third of the world’s invested capital. This year, 1,971 companies have responded² to this call for critical climate change data, thereby playing a vital role in driving sustainable economies. This information has been scored using CDP’s respected methodology, primarily by FirstCarbon Solutions, CDP’s global scoring and sustainability business process outsourcing partner. 187 of these businesses – which demonstrate a superior approach to climate change – have received an A grade for their performance and a position on CDP’s Climate Performance Leadership Index (CPLI). This is the first time CDP has produced a truly global list of performance leaders, regardless of market capitalization. Qualities of leadership This definitive league – the A List – presents the public companies that are taking the most action to help drive the transformative action at scale that we so urgently need. Further, these corporations are implementing strategies that benefit their bottom line. These companies, such as Coca Cola HBC, which has saved US$20 million and reduced its emissions by 30,000 1. Levelized cost of energy analysis – Version 8.0, Lazard, September 2014 2.  1,971 company disclosures to CDP’s climate change program were analyzed for this report to determine the CPLI group. Companies that responded voluntarily or after the scoring deadline have not been included but can be viewed online at www.cdp.net. Opportunities and risks 145 (12%) Changing consumer behavior 123 (10%) Reputation 77 (6%) Fuel/energy taxes and regulation Most commonly reported opportunities Number of times reported, and % of total opportunities reported 118 (8%) Reputation 107 (7%) Change in precipitation extremes and droughts 97 (6%) Changing consumer behavior Most commonly reported risks Number of times reported, and % of total risks reported % of companies who identify risks % of companies who identify opportunities 96% leaders 88% CDP average 99% leaders 87% CDP average
  • 9.
    09 metric tons throughproduct design, demonstrate that a low carbon future does not mean low profit. Heightened awareness of the business implications of climate change The vast majority of CPLI companies are able to identify financial and business opportunities through their climate change strategies and actions. ​ Industrial technology firm Abengoa saves US$911 million annually having diversified its energy supply by installing two solar power plants. Samsung C&T Corporation has assessed that responding to consumer demand with green products can increase its profits from sales by at least 9% within the next seven years. CPLI companies are also more aware of the range of risks that climate change presents to its operations, helping to drive efforts to reduce emissions. Electric utility company Iberdrola has invested US$3.8 billion in electricity and energy monitoring and distribution systems to cut its emissions by 50,000 metric tons. Assessing its transportation logistics has enabled car manufacturer General Motors to implement route redesigns, mode changes from road to rail, and other measures that have resulted in emissions savings of 244,000 metric tons a year and cost savings of US$287 million. More investment for bigger reductions The CPLI is investing more proportionally than its non-leading peers in activities to reduce emissions, collectively totalling US$23 billion. As a result their initiatives are more effective; they also have a higher internal rate of return (IRR). Improving energy efficiency is by far the most popular approach to reducing emissions across all companies. On average, the CPLI’s initiatives yield annual reductions of 9% per company with an IRR for each initiative of 57%. Those of their non-leading peers, however, result in 6% and 50% respectively. A company’s overall – absolute – emissions can vary for a range of reasons including mergers and acquisitions but the A List has collectively reduced its absolute emissions by 33 million metric tons in the past reporting year, with total emissions standing at 693.7 million metric tons. Additionally, the CPLI is making significantly better progress with its targets for absolute emissions reductions than its non-leading peers. Targets of all companies – leaders and non-leaders – are generally too short-term, running to 2016/17 on average. CPLI projects to reduce emissions, however, typically span 12 years, which demonstrates a willingness for some long-term investing. Policy is cited by leaders as a risk and opportunity in almost equal measure – it is likely that a lack of clear long term policy is stalling corporate progress toward ambitious long-term targets. Leaders’ investments and savings Leaders represent: 9% of respondents 46% of investment in emissions reduction activities 11% of CO²e savings from emissions reduction activities A strong stance Taking steps to reduce climate disruption on a global scale is a clear quality of performance leadership. Three quarters (78%) of the leading businesses on the A List engage with policy makers on climate change, versus 49% of the remaining pack. Companies such as AstraZeneca, the British-Swedish pharmaceutical giant, goes one step further and promotes leading industry practice through national and international trade associations in addition to key government and international agency stakeholders. It states that, “climate change is not just an environmental challenge, but also one that affects the health and livelihood of millions of people because of the links to complex issues such as poverty, economic development and population growth.” 75%of the leaders are on track to meet their emissions reduction targets vs. 59% of their non-leading peers.
  • 10.
    10 Realizing returns Practicing stronggovernance of how climate change affects their business is driving these companies to understand better how their operations impact the environmental challenges that today face the world. In turn, these companies are taking action to minimize their contribution to a changing climate and to reduce their reliance on natural resources. With such a robust approach to managing these issues, it is perhaps no surprise that the CPLI generates superior returns for its shareholders than other global indices and has outperformed the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index by 19.6% and the Bloomberg World Index by 9.6% (see page 14 for details). Get more from CDP data The analysis presented in this report is a brief summary of a subset of the data available through CDP. We encourage all readers of this report to view the full corporate responses individually from our website. Enhanced and unlimited access to the data is available through the CDP analytics tool which makes benchmarking and trend analysis simple via a series of interactive dashboards and export functions. Different versions of the tool are available for investors and companies. Visit www.cdp.net to find out more. Total Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions by sector Mt CO²e 0 20 40 60 80 387 411 370 UtilitiesIndustrialsMaterialsConsumer staples Consumer discretionary EnergyInformation technology Telecom- munication services HealthcareFinancials 2012 2013 2014 Policy: Risk or opportunity? 94%of leader companies report policy as a risk 98%of leader companies report policy as an opportunity CO ² e emissions reduced by CPLI in the past year: 33Mt
  • 11.
    11 2014 leadership criteria Eachyear, company responses are analyzed and scored against two parallel scoring schemes: performance and disclosure. This report focuses solely on performance and includes only those companies that enter the Climate Performance Leadership Index (CPLI) and achieve the highest ‘A’ band. The performance score assesses the level of action, as reported by the company, on climate change mitigation, adaptation and transparency. Its intent is to highlight positive climate action as demonstrated by a company’s CDP response. A high performance score signals that a company is measuring, verifying and managing its carbon footprint, for example by setting and meeting carbon reduction targets and implementing programs to reduce emissions in both its direct operations and supply chain. In addition to the performance leaders CDP would like to commend all companies that achieved the performance bands of A– and B this year for the excellent work they are doing with regards to climate change. This group accounts for 32% of the total number of companies that had their disclosures to CDP’s climate change program scored. It is clear from reading these responses that these companies are putting considerable resource and effort into mitigating climate risk and maximizing climate opportunities. While they do not qualify for climate performance leadership as defined by the CDP scoring methodology in 2014, many of them have been leaders in previous years. They are continuing on their pathway of investing in emission reductions, and driving this issue up through their management structure and out through their value chains. What are the CPLI criteria? To enter the CPLI (Performance Band A), a company must: ^^ Make its response public and submit via CDP’s Online Response System ^^ Attain a performance score greater than 85 ^^ Score maximum performance points on question 12.1a (absolute emissions performance) for GHG reductions due to emission reduction actions over the past year (4% or above in 2014) ^^ Disclose gross global Scope 1 and Scope 2 figures ^^ Score maximum performance points for verification of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions ^^ Furthermore, CDP reserves the right to exclude any company from the CPLI if there is anything in its response or other publicly available information that calls into question its suitability for inclusion. Note: Companies that achieve a performance score high enough to warrant inclusion in the CPLI, but do not meet all of the other CPLI requirements are classed as Performance Band A- but are not included in the CPLI. How is the CPLI used by investors? Good performance scores are used by investors as a proxy of good climate change management or climate change performance of companies. Investors identify and then engage with companies to encourage them to improve their score. The ‘Aiming for A’ initiative which was initiated by CCLA Investment Management is driven by a coalition of UK asset owners and mutual fund managers. They are asking major UK-listed utilities and extractives companies to aim for inclusion in the CPLI. This may involve filing supportive shareholder resolutions for Annual General Meetings occurring after September 2014. Investors are also using CDP scores for creation of financial products. For example, Nedbank in South Africa developed the Nedbank Green Index. Disclosure scores are used for selecting stocks and performance scores for assigning weight. For further information on the CPLI and how scores are determined, please visit www.cdp.net/ guidance.
  • 12.
    12 United Kingdom 252/19Respondents/Leaders Turkey 26/2 Switzerland64/5 Italy 45/4 Canada 97/4 USA 342/34 Sweden 48/6 Spain 39/11 South Africa 66/8 Portugal 12/2 Norway 30/3 Netherlands 30/5 Ireland 16/2 Germany 89/11 France 84/10 Finland 36/5 Denmark 20/3 Belgium 11/3 Austria 14/2 Where are the performance leaders? Respondent numbers for certain countries may differ from regional CDP reports due to submission date of response for inclusion in analysis/scoring and difference between company location and exchange/index listings. This map includes data only from countries that produced climate performance leaders. More than 4,500 companies from more than 80 countries use CDP to manage and share vital environmental information.
  • 13.
    13 Greater China 88/1 Australia76/5 South Korea 86/14 Japan 216/24 India 46/5 Resp In 2014 nearly 2,000 businesses shared climate change information with CDP and the investors that requested it. Each of these companies is commended for responding to the call, regardless of its score. Insights from CDP data are used by investors and other decision makers to help catalyze action to achieve sustainable economies. Almost half of the performance leaders are headquartered in Europe, with a further third located in USA or Japan. More than a quarter of the Spanish and Belgian companies that took part in CDP’s climate change program were awarded an A for performance, proportionally giving Spain and Belgium the most leaders. Portugal, the Netherlands and South Korea have also performed well in this regard. Of those corporations that failed to respond, the three largest in terms of market capitalization are Berkshire Hathaway, Amazon.com Inc and Comcast Corporation.
  • 14.
    14 Investor analysis: Climatechange action and market performance ECPI is based in Milan and Luxembourg and is dedicated to constructing investable products around the concept of sustainability. In order to gauge the influence of leadership in carbon management on the market performance of a company, ECPI compared the market performance of the Climate Performance Leaders Index (CPLI)1 against that of a broad market index, the Bloomberg World Index,2 and that of a global sustainability index, the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index (DJSWI),3 for the period since the launch of the CPLI in October 2010. The results support the adoption of quantitative carbon data in developing investment strategies. Over this four year period the CPLI gained 37.53%, outperforming the Bloomberg World Index which gained 34.24% and the DJSWI which gained 31.38%. Looking more closely at the geographic breakdown of these indexes,4 the CPLI contains fewer emerging market companies than the Bloomberg World Index and a greater concentration of UK companies. The CPLI also has a greater concentration of US companies than the DJSWI. CPLI 37.53% Bloomberg World Index 34.24% Dow Jones Sustainability World Index 31.38% CPLI financial performance 2010–2014 900 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 Sept 22Oct 1 20142013201220112010 Index, October 1, 2010=1,000. Prices calculated in US$. Source: data in US$ from 1/10/2010 to 22/9/2014, source ECPI based on data by Thomson Reuters Datastream and Bloomberg. At an industry level, the CPLI is over-weight in financial and ICT companies versus the other indexes as com- panies in these sectors have on average been quicker to integrate climate change into their core business strategy and set and met emissions reduction targets. Conversely, the CPLI is under-weight in energy, basic materials and industrials companies as companies in these sectors have on average found it tougher to improve their carbon efficiency and performance. The CPLI is therefore a good tool to infer the performance of the world market, while protecting the portfolio against the physical, regulatory and reputational risks associated with carbon emissions and promoting the reduction of emissions at company level. In future it might be interesting to develop an index with the same industry weightings as the world market and companies ranked according to their CDP performance score.
  • 15.
    15 1. The Indexis built using the historical composition of the CPLI, as annually assessed by CDP according to its proprietary methodology. The index adopts a market capital- ization weighting system. The index composition is updated annually, in October, to reflect the results of that year’s scoring assessment. 2. The Bloomberg World Index is a capitalization weighted index of all equities included in the Bloomberg World Index Series. Equities in the series were in the top 85% mar- ket capitalization of their respective Bloomberg Classification Sector at the time of the rebalance. The index series is rebalanced semi- annually in February and August. 3. The Dow Jones Sustainability World Index is composed of global sustainability leaders as identified by RobecoSAM through a corporate sustainability assessment. The index represents the top 10% of the largest 2,500 companies in the S&P Global BMI based on long-term economic, environmental and social criteria. Review frequency: annually in September. 4. It is worth mentioning that this comparison is influenced by the dimension of the indices and different standards adopted for industry classification. United States 39.98% United Kingdom 10.98% Switzerland 9.76% Germany 7.67% Germany 7.94% France 7.20% Spain 5.27% China 7.48% Japan 6.93% France 3.58% Other 36.58% Other 33.04% United Kingdom 10.84% United States 31.36% United States 40.51% Japan 7.42% Bloomberg World Index as of September 22, 2014 Dow Jones Sustainability World Index as of August 31, 2014 CPLI as of September 22, 2014 CPLI vs. Bloomberg World CPLI vs. DJ Sustainability World 0.53% 9.15% 5.39% –0.14% n.a. 0.27% 0.49% n.a. –8.57% –5.03% United Kingdom 5.45% n.a. n.a. Other 28.01% Sources: Bloomberg World Index, Bloomberg as of 22/9/2014; DJSWI index factsheet as of 31/8/2014 CDP index: ECPI based on data from CDP and TR Datastream. Data as of 22/9/2014. Geographic breakdown Bloomberg World Index as of September 22, 2014 DJ Sustainability World Index as of August 31, 2014 CPLI as of September 22 , 2014 CPLI vs. Bloomberg CPLI vs. DJ Sustainability Financials 22.43% Financials 21.62% Information technology 27.93% 16.45% 15.45% Consumer discretionary 12.22% Consumer goods 13.09% Financials 24.32% 1.89% 2.70% Industrials 11.79% Technology 12.48% Consumer staples 15.69% 6.50% 2.60% Information technology 11.48% Industrials 12.10% Consumer discretionary 10.05% –2.17% 3.16% Consumer staples 9.19% Health care 11.92% Industrials 8.10% –3.69% –4.00% Energy 9.03% Basic materials 8.71% Telecommunication services 4.86% 0.36% 2.91% Health care 8.75% Oil and gas 8.61% Health care 3.27% –5.76% –8.65% Materials 6.91% Consumer services 6.89% Utilities 3.09% –0.53% 0.46% Telecommunication services 4.50% Utilities 2.63% Materials 1.68% –5.23% –6.93% Utilities 3.62% Telecommunications 1.95% Energy 1.00% –7.74% –7.71% n.a. 0.07% Industry breakdown
  • 16.
    16 Emissions trend andfinancial intensity Auto components Johnson Controls Automobiles BMW AG Daimler AG Fiat General Motors Company Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. Renault Tofaș Türk Otomobil Fabrikası A.Ș. Toyota Motor Corporation Volkswagen AG Hotels, restaurants and leisure Wyndham Worldwide Corporation Household durables LG Electronics Sekisui Chemical Co., Ltd. Internet and catalogue retail YOOX SpA Media DIRECTV Reed Elsevier Group Specialty retail H&M Hennes & Mauritz AB Textiles, apparel and luxury goods Kering 2,305,828 1,415,641 3,356,000 4,178,320 8,416,034 3,430,215 1,260,493 112,127 7,611,000 9,038,463 429,809 1,263,867 828,026 1,290 195,820 122,846 356,374 123,388 54 14 21 36 54 29 23 30 29 35 86 49 66 2 6 13 18 10 Financial intensity‡2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e†Emissions trend* Top investment areas * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. × × × ×× 149 M 116 M 0.5 Mt 0.03 Mt 0.07 Mt 0.2 Mt 0.08 Mt 11 M 13 M 80 M 20 M 116 M 102 M 80 M Energy effiency: building fabric Energy effiency: building services Low carbon energy installation Behavioral change Energy efficiency: processes Investment required $449 M Annual monetary savings $239 M Annual CO²e savings 0.8 Mt CO²e Consumer discretionary Sector analysis These leading companies are acutely aware of both the risks and opportunities associated with the changing demands and expectations of the consumer market and with the obligations that come from changes to product labeling and product standards. They generally see more opportunity to capitalize on these potential changes as a way to differentiate their products and to gain market share, and expect them to have a medium to high impact within the next three years. With regard to Scope 3 emissions this group of leading companies is making good progress in reporting the most important and relevant categories. These leaders report good levels of engagement on climate change and emissions with their value chain, primarily through their suppliers, but also with customers and other partners. Nissan should be commended for being the only company in this group to set an absolute target beyond 2020, reporting a target of 24% reduction across Scope 1, 2 and 3 by 2050. Consumer awareness in environmental issues, especially in climate change, is the most important component for LGE’s long term business strategy… the resulting strategies and managerial processes have provided opportunities for competitive advantage. LG Electronics
  • 17.
    17 Being the inventorof the automobile, we accept our responsibility for its future. Our Road to emission-free mobility strategy sets clear goals: Promotion of low-carbon products and services with state-of-the-art internal combustion engines, tailor-made hybridisation and spearheading the development of local emission-free propulsion technologies. We want to be best in class with the CO² emissons of our products. As a commitment to the European Union climate targets – cutting absolute CO² emissions by 20% from 1990 to 2020 – we translated the EU target into a reduction target for our own European plants. Thus, production emissions per vehicle will decrease by two-thirds. Our Design for Environment process as well as our efforts in life-cycle assessment helped us become the world’s first manufacturer to receive an Environmental Certificate for the Mercedes-Benz S-Class in 2005. We continue this holistic approach to mitigate climate impact from our own operations while taking into account upstream and downstream effects. Daimler AG Sector profile Daimler AG
  • 18.
    18 Consumer staples Sector analysis Topinvestment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Beverages Anheuser Busch InBev Coca-Cola HBC AG Diageo Plc Heineken NV Kirin Holdings Co Ltd SABMiller Suntory Beverage & Food Food and staples retailing Aeon Co., Ltd. CVS Health J Sainsbury Plc Morrison Supermarkets Pick ‘n Pay Stores Ltd Sonae Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Food products Associated British Foods Danone Unilever plc Personal products L’Oréal Oriflame Cosmetics AB Shiseido Co., Ltd. Tobacco Philip Morris International 5,285,095 741,684 701,388 1,882,389 1,140,369 1,839,413 232,253 2,529,095 1,659,100 1,362,815 1,082,818 582,518 241,725 21,435,137 3,144,397 1,238,822 1,953,147 192,456 35,195 77,150 828,407 122 81 39 74 49 106 20 41 13 40 38 82 38 46 151 44 30 6 19 9 27 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available ×× 358 M 297 M 0.5 Mt 0.5 Mt 0.4 Mt 0.06 Mt 0.04 Mt 38 M 40 M 12 M 151 M 104 M 42 M Energy effiency: building fabric Low carbon energy installation Energy efficiency: processes Low carbon energy purchase Energy efficiency: building services Investment required $668 M Annual monetary savings $390 M Annual CO²e savings 1.4 Mt CO²e Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Beverages Anheuser Busch InBev Coca-Cola HBC AG Diageo Plc Heineken NV Kirin Holdings Co Ltd SABMiller Suntory Beverage & Food Food and staples retailing Aeon Co., Ltd. CVS Health J Sainsbury Plc Morrison Supermarkets Pick ‘n Pay Stores Ltd Sonae Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Food products Associated British Foods Danone Unilever plc Personal products L’Oréal Oriflame Cosmetics AB Shiseido Co., Ltd. Tobacco Philip Morris International 5,285,095 741,684 701,388 1,882,389 1,140,369 1,839,413 232,253 2,529,095 1,659,100 1,362,815 1,082,818 582,518 241,725 21,435,137 3,144,397 1,238,822 1,953,147 192,456 35,195 77,150 828,407 122 81 39 74 49 106 20 41 13 40 38 82 38 46 151 44 30 6 19 9 27 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available ×× 358 M 297 M 0.5 Mt 0.5 Mt 0.4 Mt 0.06 Mt 0.04 Mt 38 M 40 M 12 M 151 M 104 M 42 M Energy effiency: building fabric Low carbon energy installation Energy efficiency: processes Low carbon energy purchase Energy efficiency: building services Investment required $668 M Annual monetary savings $390 M Annual CO²e savings 1.4 Mt CO²e Similar to its peers in the discretionary sector, this group cites changing consumer behavior as the most important short-term risk and opportunity, noting that it will gain more business from an enhanced reputation, than it would lose from a damaged reputation. Changes in weather patterns that would affect raw material crop yields is cited as a significant longer-term risk by the sector, which is largely comprised of food producers and retailers. Almost all of the leaders in this sector engage with their suppliers on climate change and emissions, with half using this engagement to identify reduction opportunities, while a third use that data to score suppliers through their procurement process.  On the topic of corporate influence, this group is mostly supportive of climate legislation and virtually every company says the position of their trade associations is consistent with its own corporate position.  A third of the companies have an absolute reduction target to 2020 but only one – Kirin Holdings from Japan – has an absolute target beyond this to 2050 set at 50% for its whole value chain. Collectively, this group reduced its absolute emissions by 840,000 metric tons CO²e in the last reporting year. Food security is a key driver in longer term business decisions... it drives our aims to source more of our private label products locally and is an explicit evaluation criteria in our technology evaluations on food waste…we have changed the sourcing patterns of some fresh produce to account for changing weather conditions. Pick n Pay Holdings
  • 19.
    19 Sector profile CVS Health Asa pharmacy innovation company, our goal is to reinvent pharmacy and focus on solutions that benefit millions of people. This business vision is fully integrated into our corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategy, Prescription for a Better World, which charts our CSR course for the future, focusing on three priorities: building healthier communities; protecting the planet; and creating economic opportunities. Our approach to CSR ties directly to our purpose: helping people on their path to better health, which we believe is intrinsically linked to the sustainability of our planet. At CVS Health, we have made protecting the planet a strategic priority and are working to reduce our resource use and embed sustainability into our products and supply chain. In 2010, we set a 2018 goal to reduce our carbon intensity by 15 percent per square foot of retail space and we continue to make significant progress and are tracking positively toward that goal. CVS Health
  • 20.
    20 Energy Sector analysis This sectorhas very few companies that are able to meet the leadership criteria under CDP’s current scoring methodology. More information about how CDP is working with the oil and gas industry to develop a sector-specific approach is provided on the next page.  From the five energy companies that have achieved an A band and a position on the CPLI, the biggest risks reported were around regulation, such as cap and trade schemes, air pollution limits and carbon taxes. All of these risks are expected to impact within three years. Tropical cyclones are reported as the biggest short-term physical risk due to the costly damage that can be inflicted on fixed assets, which are often located in exposed areas.  Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Energy equipment and services Solstad Offshore Oil, gas and consumable fuels Essar Oil S-Oil Corporation Spectra Energy Corp 509,606 6,036,218 7,293,142 9,211,186 856 n/a§ 256 1,451 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. § US$ revenue figure unavailable 750 M 60 M 376 M 0.7 Mt 0.5 Mt 0.4 Mt 0.2 Mt 53 M 33 M 31 M Energy effiency: processes Low carbon energy installation Process emissions reductions Low carbon energy purchase Fugitive emissions reductions Investment required $869 M Annual monetary savings $450 M Annual CO²e savings 1.8 Mt CO²e Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Energy equipment and services Solstad Offshore Oil, gas and consumable fuels Essar Oil S-Oil Corporation Spectra Energy Corp 509,606 6,036,218 7,293,142 9,211,186 856 n/a§ 256 1,451 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. § US$ revenue figure unavailable 750 M 60 M 376 M 0.7 Mt 0.5 Mt 0.4 Mt 0.2 Mt 53 M 33 M 31 M Energy effiency: processes Low carbon energy installation Process emissions reductions Low carbon energy purchase Fugitive emissions reductions Investment required $869 M Annual monetary savings $450 M Annual CO²e savings 1.8 Mt CO²e Spectra Energy’s Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) process addresses key risks for the corporation. Material risks posed by climate change are assessed and incorporated into the ERM process. These include financial and strategic risks… A company-wide business development process is used to evaluate business opportunities including those driven by climate change such as demand growth due to carbon prices and regulatory frameworks. Spectra Energy
  • 21.
    21 Energy sector development CDPis increasing its focus on a number of key sectors, prioritized for their dependence and impact on climate change, water and deforestation. This will help to drive more targeted and effective action by companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, safeguard water resources, and prevent the destruction of forests. This move towards greater sector focus is a result of consultation with stakeholders including investors and responding companies. CDP will be implementing this approach gradually over the next three years, initially through the focus on our climate change program, and then expanding this work to cover additional environmen- tal areas. In 2015 the sector approach will be piloted on the oil and gas¹ sector, which has been prioritized for its rele- vance to climate change. The aim is to produce data that is more meaningful to investors, reduce reporting requirements for key sectors, incentivize transparency and catalyze sector-specific action. The sector approach involves: ^^ Consulting directly with investors and industry representatives, to assess the relevance of existing CDP questions that oil and gas companies have been requested to disclose to date, both from CDP’s climate change question- naire, as well as from the supplemen- tary oil and gas sector module; ^^ Adjusting climate change reporting requirements for oil and gas companies accordingly to reflect the most relevant areas for the sector and its investors; ^^ Developing sector specific guidance to drive standardization and support reporting companies; ^^ Developing a sector specific scoring methodology to assess the level of detail and comprehensiveness of oil and gas companies’ disclosures and their level of action taken on climate change; and ^^ In the longer term, introducing chang- es to CDP’s Online Response System (ORS) to provide more intuitive means to report sector-specific information. Benefits include: ^^ Collecting the most relevant and usable information for investors, decision makers and other stakeholders; ^^ Focusing companies on disclosing and taking action on key issues identified for their relevance to the environment and investors; and ^^ Providing a more meaningful assessment of companies’ progress on climate change. CDP is working closely with industry and investor representatives to develop a sector-specific climate change questionnaire for oil and gas companies ahead of the 2015 CDP disclosure period. CDP will consult on proposed changes to the climate change questions pertaining to the oil and gas sector in October 2014. 1. For O&G, CDP is initially focusing on the following sub-industries under the Global Industry Classification Standard: Integrated Oil & Gas (10102010); Oil & Gas Exploration & Production (10102020); and Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing (10102030).
  • 22.
    22 Financials Sector analysis Emissions trendand financial intensity Top investment areas Capital markets BNY Mellon Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Henderson Group UBS Commercial banks Banco Espirito Santo Banco Santander Bankia CaixaBank Comerica Incorporated Commerzbank AG Commonwealth Bank of Australia HSBC Holdings plc Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A National Australia Bank Raiffeisen Bank International AG Shinhan Financial Group Standard Bank Group Standard Chartered TD Bank Group Wells Fargo & Company Diversified financial services Bank of America Firstrand Limited ING Group Insurance Aviva Generali Deutschland Holding AG Insurance Australia Group Principal Financial Group, Inc. Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Sanlam The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. Zurich Insurance Group Real estate investment trusts Dexus Property Group Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. Investa Office Fund Redefine Properties Ltd Simon Property Group Real estate management and development Daiwa House Industry Co., Ltd. 216,396 260,209 2,223 162,813 25,030 321,988 4,271 34,494 75,839 51,344 142,498 683,376 111,737 198,388 632 105,663 353,995 250,605 207,381 1,376,340 1,448,398 248,688 88,483 78,629 31,267 44,822 60,883 33,105 39,124 74,364 125,984 111,240 590,056 35,168 44,844 482,074 351,417 14 6 2 4 4 4 0.5 5 29 2 3 8 3 5 0.05 104 26 10 7 16 14 29 1 1 1 5 7 2 4 3 2 182 114 194 127 93 14 Financial intensity‡2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e†Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available ×× ×× × 0.07 Mt 87 M 23 M 5 M 15 M 11 M 29 M 18 M 6 M 4 M 0.01 Mt 0.08 Mt 0.01 Mt Low carbon energy installation Process emissions reductions Energy efficiency: building fabric Transportation: use Energy efficiency: building services Investment required $143 M Annual monetary savings $55 M Annual CO²e savings 0.17 Mt CO²e Emissions trend and financial intensity Top investment areas Capital markets BNY Mellon Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Henderson Group UBS Commercial banks Banco Espirito Santo Banco Santander Bankia CaixaBank Comerica Incorporated Commerzbank AG Commonwealth Bank of Australia HSBC Holdings plc Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A National Australia Bank Raiffeisen Bank International AG Shinhan Financial Group Standard Bank Group Standard Chartered TD Bank Group Wells Fargo & Company Diversified financial services Bank of America Firstrand Limited ING Group Insurance Aviva Generali Deutschland Holding AG Insurance Australia Group Principal Financial Group, Inc. Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Sanlam The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. Zurich Insurance Group Real estate investment trusts Dexus Property Group Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. Investa Office Fund Redefine Properties Ltd Simon Property Group Real estate management and development Daiwa House Industry Co., Ltd. 216,396 260,209 2,223 162,813 25,030 321,988 4,271 34,494 75,839 51,344 142,498 683,376 111,737 198,388 632 105,663 353,995 250,605 207,381 1,376,340 1,448,398 248,688 88,483 78,629 31,267 44,822 60,883 33,105 39,124 74,364 125,984 111,240 590,056 35,168 44,844 482,074 351,417 14 6 2 4 4 4 0.5 5 29 2 3 8 3 5 0.05 104 26 10 7 16 14 29 1 1 1 5 7 2 4 3 2 182 114 194 127 93 14 Financial intensity‡2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e†Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available ×× ×× × 0.07 Mt 87 M 23 M 5 M 15 M 11 M 29 M 18 M 6 M 4 M 0.01 Mt 0.08 Mt 0.01 Mt Low carbon energy installation Process emissions reductions Energy efficiency: building fabric Transportation: use Energy efficiency: building services Investment required $143 M Annual monetary savings $55 M Annual CO²e savings 0.17 Mt CO²e This sector has the second highest number of performance leaders with 37 achieving the A band. Like many other sectors they cite reputation and changing consumer behavior as one of the most significant opportunities in the next three years for attracting and retaining both staff and customers. Three quarters report employee engagement and behavioral change as a key driver to achieving reductions with a payback of less than one year when combined with having a dedicated budget for energy efficiency that improves their building performance. This sector accounts for 30% of all CPLI references to employee engagement as a key driver of reductions.  Many reported short term risks from uncertainty around new regulation, as well as the potential impact of product efficiency regulation, incoming cap and trade schemes, fuel/ energy regulation and carbon taxes. With regard to Scope 3 reporting, half the group reports that the emissions associated with their investments are ‘relevant, but not yet calculated.’ This highlights a focus area for the financial sector if it is to fully understand its deeper impact on climate change.  Six of the companies have set absolute reduction targets to 2020. Goldman Sachs goes the furthest with a 100% target to be carbon neutral in all their offices and data centers. Collectively, this group reduced its absolute emissions by 340,000 metric tons CO²e in the last reporting year.”
  • 23.
    23 Sector profile National AustraliaBank Climate change is a key focus of NAB Group’s Environmental Agenda. We believe that developing our understanding of environmental challenges and managing our environmental dependencies, impacts and risks enables us to develop solutions that help our customers to take action as well. Through improved design, operation, and efficiency improvements, we have reduced our business as usual carbon emissions by more than 30% since 2006. We continue to pilot clean technology, having installed a tri-generation plant at our largest data centre and solar PV on some retail stores. We are committed to supporting the significant infrastructure demands of a lower-carbon economy through project financing for large-scale renewable energy projects in key markets. We also helped develop and provide Environmental Upgrade Agreement (EUA) finance in Australia, which funds environmental improvements in office buildings. We have assisted in funding seven EUAs, with a total investment of $12.5 million and collective savings of $0.6m per annum as a result of energy and maintenance efficiencies. National Australia Bank
  • 24.
    24 Health care Sector analysis Topinvestment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Biotechnology Novozymes A/S Healthcare equipment and services Elekta Olympus Corporation Mediclinic International Pharmaceuticals AstraZeneca Bayer AG Lundbeck A/S 383,482 9,420 115,419 173,026 599,800 8,372,000 28,352 183 6 13 60 23 157 10 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. 0.2 Mt48 M 25 M 5 M 5 M 4 M 15 M 8 M 8 M 0.01 Mt 0.04 Mt 0.04 Mt 0.02 Mt Low carbon energy installation Energy efficiensy: building fabric Energy efficiency: building services Transportation: fleet Energy efficiency: processes Investment required $80 M Annual monetary savings $40 M Annual CO²e savings 0.3 Mt CO²e Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Biotechnology Novozymes A/S Healthcare equipment and services Elekta Olympus Corporation Mediclinic International Pharmaceuticals AstraZeneca Bayer AG Lundbeck A/S 383,482 9,420 115,419 173,026 599,800 8,372,000 28,352 183 6 13 60 23 157 10 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. 0.2 Mt48 M 25 M 5 M 5 M 15 M 8 M 0.01 Mt 0.04 Mt Low carbon energy installation Energy efficiency: building services Energy efficiency: processes Investment required $80 M Annual monetary savings $40 M Annual CO²e savings 0.3 Mt CO²e This sector is relatively small and so, as expected, has only a small number of leaders. It is promising that five of the seven are in the CPLI for the first time. All seven companies report engagement with suppliers primarily for the purpose of identifying reduction actions, but there are interesting variations in Scope 3 reporting. This indicates that the assessment of relevance of Scope 3 categories can differ significantly within the same sector.  With regard to target setting, Bayer is the only health care performance leader setting absolute and intensity targets to 2020. No other has targets that go beyond 2016, demonstrating that the sector could raise its ambition for target setting. All health care leaders report that a board member is responsible for climate change and all except one have some form of monetary reward for achieving climate or energy related targets or key performance indicators. An interesting longer-term risk, albeit low impact, noted by AstraZeneca is the impact of ‘increasing humanitarian demands’ due to disaster or crisis relief in the future showing that there is certainly awareness that the impacts of climate change could affect business. Companies cite changing weather patterns and increased flooding and drought as posing risk to production sites, although Olympus notes that as a provider of equipment that can inspect water pipes it may be able to increase its business if water pipes are damaged more frequently in future due to extreme weather. It is increasingly being recognised that climate change is not just an environmental issue, but also one that affects the health and livelihood of millions of people…An Energy Board, now reconstituted as the Energy, Carbon and Water Strategy Team has been created to provide a global framework for analysing options, prioritising investments and resources, and to foster the sharing of best practice in energy technology around our global business. AstraZeneca
  • 25.
    25 Sector profile Elekta Elekta’s two-foldstrategy is to address environmental requirements in major projects and systems to make significant step changes to the benefit of the climate, while also continuously improving products and processes that contribute on a smaller scale. Participating in CDP’s climate change program has helped highlight our main areas of influence to climate change. As a result, Elekta has invested in equipment to reduce emissions by capturing SF6 in production, a potent greenhouse gas but necessary cooling agent, and to return it to the suppliers for cleaning or destruction. Providing energy-efficient products will become even more important in the future. One of Elekta’s main cancer treatment products, the linear accelerator, is built on technology that enables clinics to reduce their energy need by approximately 30%, and thus their cost of treatments. The products also enable treatment capacity in emerging markets, where energy supplies might be both limited and costly. Elekta
  • 26.
    26 Emissions trend andfinancial intensity Top investment areas Aerospace and defense Bombardier Inc. Cobham Lockheed Martin Corporation Northrop Grumman Corp Thales Air freight and logistics bpost Airlines Finnair Building products Daikin Industries, Ltd. Toto Ltd. Commercial services and supplies Dai Nippon Printing Co., Ltd. Toppan Printing Co., Ltd. Construction and engineering Abengoa Balfour Beatty Carillion Doosan Heavy Industries & Construction Hyundai E&C Larsen & Toubro Royal BAM Group nv Shimizu Corporation Taisei Corporation Electrical equipment Schneider Electric Industrial conglomerates Royal Philips Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Toshiba Corporation Machinery CNH Industrial NV IHI Corporation Komatsu Ltd. MAN SE Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. Marine Dampskibsselskabet NORDEN A/S Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd Professional services SGS SA Road and rail Canadian National Railway Company CSX Corporation Deutsche Bahn Trading companies and distributors Samsung C&T Transportation infrastructure Flughafen München GmbH 316,244 134,724 1,107,832 609,047 248,295 74,946 2,361,189 1,317,960 316,164 1,059,100 1,099,758 3,984,008 434,610 177,927 274,525 51,658 602,233 270,809 256,449 237,100 464,826 851,689 2,335,921 2,759,000 536,945 242,666 438,297 463,756 350,662 273,560 11,417,009 18,332,853 229,210 5,404,327 5,564,960 9,941,900 62,444 100,175 17 48 24 34 13 23 741 84 55 60 60 408 32 34 45 5 44 29 15 14 15 27 23 40 16 16 19 22 32 127 831 1,004 36 526 463 256 4 65 Financial intensity‡2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e†Emissions trend* * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. × × × × × × × × Transportation: fleet Energy efficiency processes Process emissions reductions Energy efficiency: building services Low carbon energy installation Investment required $3,973 M Annual monetary savings $1,216 M Annual CO²e savings 1.4 Mt CO²e 0.55 Mt 0.27 Mt 0.4 Mt 0.09 Mt 0.06 Mt 2 B 915 M 166 M 52 M 70 M 1.8 B Industrials Sector analysis For the first time this sector produced the highest number (38) of performance leaders showing that it is stepping up its efforts to tackle climate change, reduce its impact and lessen its exposure. The responses show that many companies see reputation and changing consumer behavior as one of the biggest risks. However, defining a competitive advantage within the next three years is also one of the biggest opportunities. On the physical side, many companies report that the biggest risk in the next year is the damage and disruption caused by tropical cyclones and increased extremes in precipitation and drought.  More than three quarters of these leaders engage with their suppliers, and over half with their customers in order to manage risk and the impact of regulation in their supply chain, to identify areas for reduction action and to stimulate the development of new products.  Eight of the leaders in this sector have absolute targets out to 2020 with the % reduction ranging from 7% to 35%. 
  • 27.
    27 Sector profile Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Whenit comes to energy efficiency, environmental and economic benefits go successfully hand in hand. With innovative, resource- and energy-efficient technologies, we provide our customers with a competitive edge and support them in cutting energy costs and reducing their CO² emissions. One among many examples are the use of optimized drive technologies, which can cut energy consumption by up to 70% and significantly reduce total cost of ownership. While applying them in our own operations as our contribution to “walk the talk,” the much bigger impact in terms of carbon abatement is at our customers. In the last fiscal year we were able to help our customers reduce their CO² emissions by 377 million metric tons through products, solutions and services from the Siemens Environmental Portfolio. This equals the carbon emissions of approximately 45% of Germany’s annual carbon emissions. Siemens Aktiengesellschaft
  • 28.
    28 Information technology Sector analysis Emissionstrend and financial intensity Top investment areas Communications equipment Cisco Systems, Inc. Ericsson Juniper Networks, Inc. Nokia Group Computers and peripherals Apple Inc. Hewlett-Packard Electronic equipment, instruments and components Delta Electronics Hitachi, Ltd. Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd. Samsung SDI Vaisala Oyj Internet software and services Akamai Technologies Inc Google Inc. IT services Accenture Amadeus IT Holding Atos SE Cap Gemini EVRY ASA Fujitsu Ltd. Groupe Steria Tata Consultancy Services Tech Mahindra Wipro Office electronics Konica Minolta, Inc. Semiconductors and equipment Samsung Electronics SK Hynix Software Adobe Systems, Inc. Autodesk, Inc. Microsoft Corporation SAP AG 722,204 356,900 98,903 157,200 121,898 1,795,000 262,284 3,888,476 932,999 819,850 7,063 103,624 1,286,626 265,143 19,659 74,079 156,268 12,305 949,000 13,757 422,589 100,599 256,244 402,289 8,018,000 4,494,307 43,057 4,450 1,317,029 220,356 15 10 21 9 1 16 6 36 167 225 19 66 22 9 5 6 12 6 18 6 36 80 37 41 55 354 10 2 17 10 Financial intensity‡2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e†Emissions trend* 'Other' includes a variety of energy saving measures, such as improving facilities and voluntary staff initiatives. Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available × × × × 0.1 Mt 86 M 31 M 3 M 68 M31 M 31 M 8 M 0.03 Mt 0.4 MtLow carbon energy installation Other Energy efficiency: processes Transportation: fleet Energy efficiency: building services Investment required $156 M Annual monetary savings $105 M Annual CO²e savings 0.5 Mt CO²e Emissions trend and financial intensity Top investment areas Communications equipment Cisco Systems, Inc. Ericsson Juniper Networks, Inc. Nokia Group Computers and peripherals Apple Inc. Hewlett-Packard Electronic equipment, instruments and components Delta Electronics Hitachi, Ltd. Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd. Samsung SDI Vaisala Oyj Internet software and services Akamai Technologies Inc Google Inc. IT services Accenture Amadeus IT Holding Atos SE Cap Gemini EVRY ASA Fujitsu Ltd. Groupe Steria Tata Consultancy Services Tech Mahindra Wipro Office electronics Konica Minolta, Inc. Semiconductors and equipment Samsung Electronics SK Hynix Software Adobe Systems, Inc. Autodesk, Inc. Microsoft Corporation SAP AG 722,204 356,900 98,903 157,200 121,898 1,795,000 262,284 3,888,476 932,999 819,850 7,063 103,624 1,286,626 265,143 19,659 74,079 156,268 12,305 949,000 13,757 422,589 100,599 256,244 402,289 8,018,000 4,494,307 43,057 4,450 1,317,029 220,356 15 10 21 9 1 16 6 36 167 225 19 66 22 9 5 6 12 6 18 6 36 80 37 41 55 354 10 2 17 10 Financial intensity‡2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e†Emissions trend* 'Other' includes a variety of energy saving measures, such as improving facilities and voluntary staff initiatives. Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. × information not public (only available to CDP investors) × information not available × × × × 0.1 Mt 86 M 31 M 3 M 68 M31 M 31 M 8 M 0.03 Mt 0.4 MtLow carbon energy installation Other Energy efficiency: processes Transportation: fleet Energy efficiency: building services Investment required $156 M Annual monetary savings $105 M Annual CO²e savings 0.5 Mt CO²e This sector is widely understood to be one of the fundamental driving forces of change in the business and consumer societies. Data centers can use large amounts of energy so any shifts to renewable power sources for data centers can have a significant effect. Unsurprisingly for such a forward thinking group of companies, reputation is a major concern for the sector and is frequently cited in both risk and opportunity assessments. Delivering innovation to meet product efficiency regulations is another well-reported opportunity.   A number of companies also highlighted the impacts felt throughout the industry in the wake of the 2011 Thailand floods which severely impacted on the supply of components to meet orders, thus affecting the bottom line. As it is very likely this type of flooding will happen again, it necessitated a strategic re- evaluation of alternative sources for these critical elements of the supply chain.  With regard to reduction target setting, a number of companies have absolute targets out to 2020, but only Konica Minolta is looking beyond this with a long-term target out to 2050. 
  • 29.
    29 1 As ofMarch 1, 2014. Among white OLED lighting panels with a luminance area of 15 cm² or greater. Based on a research by Konica Minolta. 2 Based on calculation for 7.4 × 7.4 cm panel size. As the world moves toward a genuine low-carbon society, there is a business opportunity in the lighting sector with energy-saving devices that exceed the capabilities of existing lighting. Looking ten years ahead, we are working to develop and commercialize Organic Light Emitting Diode (OLED) lighting. In fiscal 2013, we succeeded in increasing the luminous efficiency, a major challenge for achieving broader application of the technology, to 131 lm/W, which is better than general LED lighting and is the world’s highest luminous efficiency for an OLED.¹ As OLEDs do not use mercury like fluorescent lights, their environmental impact is low. In addition, we have leveraged our proprietary technical capabilities to develop thin and flexible OLED lighting panels. The super-thin, super-light and bendable panels are easy to implement in innovative designs traditional lighting has never realized. We anticipate there is a strong demand, including building/interior materials and autos, for those unique features that work as our advantage. We have invested about 10 billion yen to build the world’s first mass production plant for the flexible type, adopting the highly productive roll-to-roll processing, and plan to start production this fall. The plant has a capacity to manufacture one million panels² per month. Konica Minolta, Inc Sector profile Konica Minolta, Inc
  • 30.
    30 In anticipation ofincreasing energy costs and possible carbon/energy taxes, Mosaic is committed to continuously working to improve our use of energy and lower our emissions. We have employed utility engineers at individual facilities to identify and execute energy efficiency projects including energy efficiency upgrades, cogeneration and the use of electricity generated by hydroelectric sources. The Mosaic Company Materials Sector analysis Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Chemicals Johnson Matthey LG Chem Syngenta International AG The Mosaic Company Construction materials Italcementi Metals and mining ACERINOX Anglo American Platinum Harmony Gold Mining Co Ltd Teck Resources Limited Paper and forest products Holmen UPM-Kymmene Corporation 417,668 7,118,320 1,127,000 4,410,252 30,762,715 378,493 5,935,532 2,742,440 3,089,147 289,000 7,310,000 25 384 77 489 5,468 72 1,089 1,520 339 116 547 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. 64 M 19 M 0.1 M 0.2 M 0.07 M 28 M 4 M 22 M 11 M 4 M Energy efficiency: processes Transportation: fleet Low carbon energy purchase Process emissions reductions Low carbon energy installation Investment required $101 M Annual monetary savings $53 M Annual CO²e savings 0.4 Mt CO²e Of the 11 materials companies making the CPLI this year, only three are returning performers. Such a high proportion of new leaders is encouraging. It shows that reporting and taking action on climate change have been stepped up within this sector.  As with some other sectors, no company has set a target beyond 2020 for either absolute or intensity reductions. There is room for the sector to be bolder and look further ahead, and perhaps to take part in CDP’s science based targets project as a means of positive differentiation. All of the leading materials companies engage with suppliers to identify emissions reduction opportunities and to innovate new products. Collectively, this group reduced its absolute emissions by 2.7 Mt CO²e in the last reporting year. Many of the most frequently reported short-term risks lie in the physical and regulatory areas. Such risks are primarily focussed on uncertainty around future regulation, the impact of carbon taxes, cap and trade schemes and air pollution limits. Difficulty of operating under extreme weather conditions or with reduced water availability are also often cited risks. Conversely, a number of companies noted that many of the long-term opportunities to increase their business could result from those same disrupted and extreme weather patterns. New shipping routes or areas of land previously inaccessible may be opened, or the need for chemical treatment of water or land contaminated as a result of flooding or other extreme weather events may increase. While these scenarios may be unpalatable to consider from an environmental perspective, the likelihood of them happening is rapidly increasing and these type of products will be required as part of the solution for humans to adapt to changing living conditions.  
  • 31.
    31 Sector profile Johnson Matthey JohnsonMatthey is a global speciality chemicals company and world leader in sustainable technologies. Listed on the FTSE 100, the company delivered £427 million profit in 2014. However, to us, good performance is not just about profit; it’s about running our business in the most sustainable way. We focus on developing high technology products that optimise the use of natural resources and enhance quality of life for millions of people around the world. Our catalyst technologies enable industrial customers to abate harmful emissions and operate their plants using minimum resources, whilst our recycling technologies ensure that valuable precious metals are conserved and reused. Forty years ago, Johnson Matthey pioneered the development of emission control catalysts for vehicles and, since their introduction, our products have destroyed many millions of tonnes of acid gases, cleaning up the air we breathe. And as we look to the future, we are developing fuel cell and battery technologies to reduce CO² emissions from the next generation of vehicles. Johnson Matthey
  • 32.
    32 Telecommunication services Sector analysis Topinvestment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Diversified telecommunication services Belgacom BT Group Koninklijke KPN NV (Royal KPN) KT Corporation Nippon Telegraph & Telephone Corporation (NTT) Orange Telefonica Telenor Group TeliaSonera Wireless telecommunication services Sprint Nextel Corporation 57,035 252,243 37,903 1,098,991 4,420,865 1,458,270 1,883,052 1,017,257 439,371 1,528,777 7 9 3 67 34 27 25 57 28 43 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. 445 M 82 M 0.5 Mt 0.14 Mt 0.07 Mt 28 M 3 M 70 M 15 M Energy efficiency: processes Low carbon energy installation Energy efficiency: building services Process emissions reductions Product design Investment required $538 M Annual monetary savings $117 M Annual CO²e savings 0.8 Mt CO²e Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Diversified telecommunication services Belgacom BT Group Koninklijke KPN NV (Royal KPN) KT Corporation Nippon Telegraph & Telephone Corporation (NTT) Orange Telefonica Telenor Group TeliaSonera Wireless telecommunication services Sprint Nextel Corporation 57,035 252,243 37,903 1,098,991 4,420,865 1,458,270 1,883,052 1,017,257 439,371 1,528,777 7 9 3 67 34 27 25 57 28 43 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. 445 M 82 M 0.5 Mt 0.14 Mt 0.07 Mt 28 M 3 M 70 M 15 M Energy efficiency: processes Low carbon energy installation Energy efficiency: building services Process emissions reductions Product design Investment required $538 M Annual monetary savings $117 M Annual CO²e savings 0.8 Mt CO²e All except two of the leaders in this sector are returning leaders, which shows those companies have managed to maintain momentum. All report engagement with their suppliers to identify reduction opportunities, enhance product innovation and use supplier scorecards in the procurement process. In reporting their Scope 3 emissions most are making good progress on assessing and calculating their upstream emissions, and there appears to be a consensus around which of the downstream categories are not relevant. These companies have particularly good results in the emission reduction activities invested in, with six of the ten companies citing reductions of more than 10%. BT Group and Royal KPN in particular have achieved very large reductions in their Scope 2 emissions over the last three years. Many companies reference the GESI Smarter2020 report and recommendations as informing their strategy and being consistent with their own corporate strategy. Across the whole suite of physical and regulatory risks and opportunities there is no clear stand out with most of the available categories getting at least one mention, but again it is clear that reputation and changing consumer behavior present the most reported risks and opportunities. As technology innovators these companies want to be seen as leading the way to a low carbon future by providing the tools for their customers to reduce emissions thus any perception of holding it back could be damaging.  Sustainability is more and more a mandatory component and a key differentiator in governmental tendering processes, driven by the EU directives. In general we see a rising customer awareness and demand to help them to reduce energy costs. As an ICT company we have and further develop the solutions to help other sectors on their journey to reduce carbon footprint and energy consumption. Belgacom
  • 33.
    33 Sector profile BT Group AtBT we use the power of communications to make a better world. As one of the world’s largest communications technology companies, we’re in a position to make a real difference. In June 2013 we launched our Net Good programme with a straightforward vision: To help our customers reduce emissions by at least three times the end-to-end carbon impact of our business. We’re proud of our achievements so far, which include developing and sharing our emission measurement methodology, identifying 15 ways in which our portfolio helps our customers avoid carbon emissions and reducing our operational carbon emissions by over 25%. We have also launched pilots for new and innovative carbon saving innovations such as MK Smart and we are advancing the Net Positive movement through the Net Positive Group and our Better Future Forum. Our people are also playing their part with 78% of employees involved in energy saving initiatives. Net Good is about real progress – for us, our partners and customers, for society and the planet. BT Group
  • 34.
    34 Utilities Sector analysis Top investment areas Emissionstrend and financial intensity Electric utilities ACCIONA S.A. EnBW Energie Baden-Württemberg AG Endesa Entergy Corporation Iberdrola SA Pepco Holdings, Inc. SSE VERBUND AG Gas utilities Gas Natural SDG SA Korea District Heating Corp. Multi utilities Centrica RWE AG 635,844 23,639,000 48,797,175 35,106,164 32,843,476 1,403,128 21,884,879 3,762,660 22,343,386 4,937,373 7,146,411 167,200,000 72 866 1,177 3,082 744 301 489 890 674 2,032 172 2,449 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. Data are drawn from question 3.3b. Figures reflect total reported investment and savings. Some companies do not provide quantitative data for all disclosed projects. Thus, any implied relationship between investment, monetary savings, and CO²e reductions, as a sector, may be limited. For deeper analyses, refer to company-specific information. 7 B 9 M 144 M 1 Mt 19 Mt 0.6 Mt 79 M 69 M 5 B 3 B 689 M 524 M Low carbon energy installation Process emissions reductions Energy efficiency: building fabric Fugitive emissions reductions Energy efficiency: processes Investment required $16 B Annual monetary savings $301 M Annual CO²e savings 21 Mt CO²e Top investment areas Emissions trend and financial intensity Electric utilities ACCIONA S.A. EnBW Energie Baden-Württemberg AG Endesa Entergy Corporation Iberdrola SA Pepco Holdings, Inc. SSE VERBUND AG Gas utilities Gas Natural SDG SA Korea District Heating Corp. Multi utilities Centrica RWE AG 635,844 23,639,000 48,797,175 35,106,164 32,843,476 1,403,128 21,884,879 3,762,660 22,343,386 4,937,373 7,146,411 167,200,000 72 866 1,177 3,082 744 301 489 890 674 2,032 172 2,449 Financial intensity‡ 2014 S1+S2, tCO ² e† Emissions trend* * S1+S2 emissions reported to CDP 2012–2014 † Total of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions reported to CDP 2014 ‡ Financial intensity: Metric tons CO²e per unit of revenue (US$million) (scope 1&2 emissions). US$ revenue data sourced from Bloomberg for 2013 financial year. 7 B 9 M 144 M 1 Mt 19 Mt 0.6 Mt 79 M 69 M 5 B 3 B 689 M 524 M Low carbon energy installation Process emissions reductions Energy efficiency: building fabric Fugitive emissions reductions Energy efficiency: processes Investment required $16 B Annual monetary savings $301 M Annual CO²e savings 21 Mt CO²e This group of companies finds itself in a somewhat difficult position due to the nature of its business as energy providers. Many have been working hard to engage with their customers, promoting programs to encourage and incentivize less reliance on electricity. In fact it is the only sector that engages more with customers than with suppliers. When combined with a shift away from coal to renewables, this has enabled it to achieve reductions. SSE in particular reports a 24% increase in renewable generation and a 20% reduction in coal generation. While some of SSE’s reductions were as a result of reduced demand this is still a very positive step forward.  Though utilities leaders reported instances of risk from uncertainty around forthcoming regulation, and the impact of new cap and trade or carbon tax schemes, almost as many reported this as a potential opportunity either by leveling the playing field or allowing the growth of low carbon electricity generation. Companies who see this low carbon future as part of their strategy welcome new regulation since they are ahead of their peers who have not yet made the decision to invest in renewables in this way.   With regard to target setting special mention should go to Verbund who has committed to a 100% absolute reduction by 2050, that is to provide carbon neutral power supply.  Two other companies have absolute targets to 2020. Collectively, this group of companies accounts for the majority of the 33Mt CO²e reductions reported by the 2014 CPLI. A deep change in the generation mix, derived from the increase in fossil fuel prices and policies to support security of supply and reduced CO2 emissions, is taking place. IBERDROLA, as a wind power-leader, can face up to this situation due to the development of low carbon technologies and the ecoefficiency strategy… an investment has been established to achieve a renewable production of 40% among the total Group’s production. Iberdrola
  • 35.
    35 Sector profile ACCIONA ACCIONA drivesthe transition towards a low-carbon economy. In 2013, the company avoided the emission of 15 million tonnes of CO² into the atmosphere, equivalent to 24 times the CO² generated in its production activities. ACCIONA is a global leader in renewable energy, infrastructure, water and services. With a history of over 100 years and operations in over 30 countries on five continents, the company is staunchly committed to sustainable development as the backbone of its business strategy. It develops and manages environmentally- and socially-responsible projects, producing only renewable energy, making advances in the area of water to alleviate the issue of water scarcity, and building efficient infrastructure. ACCIONA promotes the adoption of ambitious global targets for reducing emissions and energy consumption, leading the transition towards a low carbon economy. Since 2007, ACCIONA has reduced its CO² emissions by 63% and its energy consumption by 61%. ACCIONA
  • 36.
    36 Building on climatechange leadership The impacts of climate change, water stress and deforestation are today affecting people’s lives all over the world and if unchecked will cause devastation for generations to come.   Corporations, investors and governments must take responsibility to create the systemic change we need for an environmentally sustainable economy. For this reason we congratulate those companies that have achieved a position on CDP’s 2014 Climate Performance Leadership Index. All economic activity ultimately depends upon a steady flow of natural goods and services, such as fresh water, timber and food crops, or climate regulation and flood control. These goods and services can be considered the ‘income’ generated by the world’s natural capital, the assets upon which the global economy rests. However, as is becoming increasingly clear, we are eroding that natural capital base. Businesses and investors are paying increasing attention to the erosion of the world’s natural capital. By some estimates, the global economy is incurring unpriced natural capital costs of US$7.3 trillion/year, or 13% of global output. CDP has built a unique global system to drive transparency and accountability for business impacts across the earth’s natural capital, starting with climate, then moving into water and forest-risk commodities. Our programs are designed to help assess and manage corporate exposures to environmental risks and ultimately to set companies on the path to natural capital leadership. Deforestation and forest degradation accounts for approximately 15% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, the equivalent of the entire transport sector. Land use change for agriculture is the main driver of deforestation, with five agricultural commodities responsible for most deforestation globally: Timber, palm oil, soy, cattle and bio-fuels. CDP’s forests program provides the only unified system for disclosing corporate deforestation risk exposure and management information across these key commodities. Discover if you can help reduce your business risks and limit your contribution to deforestation at cdp.net/forests. Water security is one of the most tangible and fast-growing social, political and economic challenges faced today according to the World Economic Forum. CDP’s water program helps businesses to respond to this challenge, to measure and manage water-related risks in their direct operations and supply chains, and to attain a position of leadership by starting the journey to water stewardship. Find out more at cdp.net/water. Through CDP, major multinationals are using their purchasing power to achieve sustainable supply chains. Our 66 member companies who represent US$1.15 trillion in annual purchasing spend work with CDP. This enables them to implement successful supplier engagement strategies that reduce emissions, mitigate water and other environmental risks, and protect against escalating costs in supply chains. Join us at cdp.net/supplychain.
  • 37.
    37 Appendix I Investor members CDPworks with investors globally to advance the investment opportunities and reduce the risks posed by climate change by asking over 5,000 of the world’s largest companies to report their climate strategies, GHG emissions and energy use through CDP’s standardized format. To learn more about CDP’s member offering and becoming a member, please contact us or visit www.cdp.net/en-US/WhatWeDo/. Where are the signatory investors located?* Investors by typeCDP investor base continues to grow* CDP investor members 2014 ABRAPP – Associação Brasileira das Entidades Fechadas de Previdência Complementar AEGON N.V. ATP Group Aviva plc Aviva Investors AXA Group Bank of America Merrill Lynch Bendigo & Adelaide Bank Limited BlackRock Boston Common Asset Management, LLC BP Investment Management Limited California Public Employees’ Retirement System California State Teachers’ Retirement System Calvert Investment Management, Inc. Capricorn Investment Group, LLC Catholic Super CCLA Investment Management Ltd ClearBridge Investments DEXUS Property Group Fachesf Fapes Fundação Itaú Unibanco Generation Investment Management Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Henderson Global Investors HSBC Holdings plc Infraprev KLP Legg Mason Global Asset Management London Pensions Fund Authority Mobimo Holding AG Mongeral Aegon Seguros e Previdência S/A Morgan Stanley National Australia Bank Limited Neuberger Berman Nordea Investment Management Norges Bank Investment Management NEI Investments Petros PFA Pension Previ Real Grandeza Robeco RobecoSAM AG Rockefeller Asset Management, Sustainability & Impact Investing Group Royal Bank of Canada Royal Bank of Scotland Group Sampension KP Livsforsikring A/S Schroders Scottish Widows Investment Partnership SEB AB Serpros Sistel Sompo Japan Nipponkoa Holdings, Inc Standard Chartered TD Asset Management The Wellcome Trust 200 North America 70 Latin America & Caribbean 366 Europe 70 Asia 64 Australia & New Zealand 15 Africa 312 Asset managers 256 Asset owners 152 Banks 38 Insurance 27 Other ’13’12’11’10’09’08’07’06’05’04’03 8778 ’14 927164555741312110 4.5 CDP investor signatory assets in US$ trillions 722 767 655 551 534 475 385 315 225 155 95 35 CDP investor signatories * There were 767 investor signatories on 1st February 2014 when the official CDP climate change letter was sent to companies, however some investors joined after this date and are only reflected in the ‘geographical’ and ‘type’ breakdown.
  • 38.
    38 Appendix II Largest non-respondersby market capitalization¹ Company Country Consumer discretionary Amazon.com Inc. USA Comcast Corporation USA The Priceline Group Inc USA Rakuten,Inc. Japan Fast Retailing Co., Ltd. Japan Naspers South Africa Galaxy Entertainment Group Greater China Time Warner Cable Inc. USA Hermes International France Swatch Group Switzerland Discovery Communications, Inc. USA Dish Network Corp USA Luxottica Group Italy Wynn Macau Ltd USA Prada Italy Consumer staples Costco Wholesale Corporation USA Magnit Russia Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc. Canada Lorillard Inc. USA Tyson Foods, Inc. USA Monster Beverage Corporation USA Beam Inc USA Thai Beverage PCL Thailand Cencosud SA Chile Want Want China Holdings Ltd. Greater China Colruyt Belgium Church & Dwight Co., Inc USA Inner Mongolia Yili Industrial Group Greater China Yakult Honsha Co Ltd. Japan Kimberly-Clark de México S.A.B. de C.V. Mexico Energy Rosneft Russia Enterprise Products Partners L.P. USA Phillips 66 USA Reliance Industries India Oil & Natural Gas India Kinder Morgan Inc. USA National Oilwell Varco, Inc. USA RN Holding OAO Russia Coal India India Valero Energy Corporation USA Marathon Petroleum USA Williams Companies, Inc. USA Formosa Petrochemical Greater China Tenaris S.A. Luxembourg Company Country Financials Berkshire Hathaway USA Royal Bank of Canada Canada Sberbank Rossii Russia AIA Group Ltd. Greater China Investor AB Sweden Munich Re Germany Bank of China Greater China Cheung Kong Greater China Sun Hung Kai Properties Greater China DBS Group Holdings Singapore American Tower Corp. USA Sampo Oyj Finland Discover Financial Services USA United Overseas Bank Singapore Health care Gilead Sciences, Inc. USA Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. Canada McKesson Corporation USA Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. USA Alexion Pharmaceuticals USA HCA USA Perrigo Co. USA Sun Pharmaceutical Industries India St. Jude Medical, Inc. USA Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc USA Mylan Inc. USA Zoetis Inc USA Otsuka Holdings Co., Ltd. Japan AmerisourceBergen Corp. USA Forest Laboratories, Inc. USA Industrials Hutchison Whampoa Greater China Caterpillar Inc. USA Precision Castparts Corp. USA Jardine Strategic Greater China Jardine Matheson Greater China Air China Limited Greater China General Dynamics Corporation USA Shanghai International Airport Greater China SMC Corporation Japan Schindler Holding AG Switzerland Nielsen Holdings USA China Eastern Airlines Co., Ltd. Greater China China COSCO Holdings Greater China Bolloré France Pentair, Inc. USA 1. Market capitalization data sourced from Bloomberg. For purposes of this table the term ‘non-responders’ includes companies classified as ‘no response,’ ‘declined to participate,’ and ‘provided information’ and companies that registered to respond but never actually submitted.
  • 39.
    39 Company Country Information technology TencentHoldings Greater China Facebook USA Baidu Inc Greater China ASML Holding Netherlands Keyence Corporation Japan Naver South Korea LinkedIn Corp. USA Nintendo Co., Ltd. Japan MediaTek Greater China Paychex, Inc. USA GungHo Online Entertainment, Inc. Japan Activision Blizzard USA Yandex NV Netherlands Amphenol Corporation USA Avago Technologies USA Materials LyondellBasell Industries Cl A Netherlands MMC Norilsk Nickel OSJC Russia Grupo Mexico S.A.B. de CV Mexico Southern Copper Corporation Peru Nucor Corporation USA CF Industries Holdings, Inc. USA Formosa Plastics Corp Greater China Nan Ya Plastics Greater China Gerdau S/A Brazil Formosa Chemicals & Fibre Corporation Greater China Novolipetsk Steel OJSC Russia Novolipetskii Metallurgicheski Kombinat (NLMK) Russia Polyus Gold Russia FMC Corp USA NMDC India Company Country Telecommunication services SoftBank Corporation Japan America Movil Mexico T Mobile USA inc USA Crown Castle International Corp USA VimpelCom Ltd Netherlands Mobile TeleSystems OJSC Russia Bharti Airtel India MegaFon OAO Russia AFK Sistema JFSC Russia Tele2 AB Sweden Iliad France Axiata Group Berhad Malaysia Embratel Participacoes SA Brazil TÜRK TELEKOMÜNİKASYON A.Ş. Turkey Rostelecom Russia Utilities Dominion Resources, Inc. USA NextEra Energy, Inc. USA The Southern Company USA Hong Kong & China Gas Company Limited Greater China PPL Corporation USA NTPC Ltd India Canadian Utilities Canada Saudi Electricity Saudi Arabia Public Service Enterprise Group Inc. USA PNE WIND AG Germany Edison International USA CEZ Czech Republic FirstEnergy Corporation USA The Kansai Electric Power Co., Inc. Japan Power Assets Holdings Limited Greater China
  • 40.
    40 767financial institutions withassets of US$92 trillion were signatories to the CDP 2014 climate change information request dated February 1, 2014. 3Sisters Sustainable Management LLC Aberdeen Asset Managers Aberdeen Immobilien KAG mbH ABRAPP—Associação Brasileira das Entidades Fechadas de Previdência Complementar Achmea NV Active Earth Investment Management Acuity Investment Management Addenda Capital Inc. Advanced Investment Partners AEGON N.V. AEGON-INDUSTRIAL Fund Management Co., Ltd AIG Asset Management AK Asset Management Inc. Akbank T.A.Ş. Alberta Investment Management Corporation (AIMCo) Alberta Teachers Retirement Fund Board Alcyone Finance AllenbridgeEpic Investment Advisers Limited Alliance Trust PLC Allianz Elementar Versicherungs-AG Allianz Global Investors Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH Allianz Group Altira Group Amalgamated Bank Amlin plc AMP Capital Investors AmpegaGerling Investment GmbH Amundi AM ANBIMA—Associação Brasileira das Entidades dos Mercados Financeiro e de Capitais Antera Gestão de Recursos S.A. APG Appleseed Fund AQEX LLC Aquila Capital Arisaig Partners Asia Pte Ltd Arjuna Capital Arkx Investment Management Arma Portföy Yönetimi A.Ş. Armstrong Asset Management As You Sow ASM Administradora de Recursos S.A. Appendix III Investor signatories ASN Bank Assicurazioni Generali Spa ATI Asset Management Atlantic Asset Management Pty Ltd ATP Group Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Australian Ethical Investment AustralianSuper Avaron Asset Management AS Aviva Investors Aviva plc AXA Group BAE Systems Pension Funds Investment Management Ltd Baillie Gifford & Co. BaltCap Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena Group Banco Bradesco S/A Banco Comercial Português S.A. Banco de Credito del Peru BCP Banco de Galicia y Buenos Aires S.A. Banco do Brasil Previdência Banco do Brasil S/A Banco Espírito Santo, SA Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social—BNDES Banco Popular Español Banco Sabadell, S.A. Banco Santander Banesprev—Fundo Banespa de Seguridade Social Banesto Banif, SA Bank Handlowy w Warszawie S.A. Bank Leumi Le Israel Bank of America Merrill Lynch Bank of Montreal Bank Vontobel AG Bankhaus Schelhammer & Schattera Kapitalanlagegesellschaft m.b.H. BANKIA S.A. Bankinter bankmecu Banque Degroof Banque Libano-Française Barclays Basellandschaftliche Kantonalbank BASF Sociedade de Previdência Complementar Basler Kantonalbank Bâtirente Baumann and Partners S.A. Bayern LB BayernInvest Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH BBC Pension Trust Ltd. BBVA BC Investment Management Corporation Bedfordshire Pension Fund Beetle Capital BEFIMMO SA Bendigo & Adelaide Bank Limited Bentall Kennedy Berenberg Bank Berti Investments BioFinance Administração de Recursos de Terceiros Ltda BlackRock Blom Bank SAL Blumenthal Foundation BNP Paribas Investment Partners BNY Mellon BNY Mellon Service Kapitalanlage Gesellschaft Boardwalk Capital Management Boston Common Asset Management, LLC BP Investment Management Limited Brasilprev Seguros e Previdência S/A. Breckenridge Capital Advisors British Airways Pension Investment Management Limited British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme Brown Advisory BSW Wealth Partners BT Financial Group BT Investment Management Busan Bank CAAT Pension Plan Cadiz Holdings Limited CAI Corporate Assets International AG Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec Caisse des Dépôts Caixa de Previdência dos Funcionários do Banco do Nordeste do Brasil (CAPEF) Caixa Econômica Federal Caixa Geral de Depósitos CaixaBank, S.A California Public Employees’ Retirement System California State Teachers’ Retirement System California State Treasurer Calvert Investment Management, Inc. Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) Canadian Labour Congress Staff Pension Fund CAPESESP Capital Innovations, LLC Capricorn Investment Group, LLC CareSuper Carmignac Gestion CASER PENSIONES Cathay Financial Holding Catherine Donnelly Foundation Catholic Super CBF Church of England Funds CBRE Cbus Superannuation Fund CCLA Investment Management Ltd Cedrus Asset Management Celeste Funds Management Limited Central Finance Board of the Methodist Church Ceres CERES—Fundação de Seguridade Social
  • 41.
    41 Appendix III Investor signatories Challenger ChangeInvestment Management Christian Brothers Investment Services Christian Super Christopher Reynolds Foundation Church Commissioners for England Church of England Pensions Board CI Mutual Funds’ Signature Global Advisors City Developments Limited Clean Yield Asset Management ClearBridge Investments Climate Change Capital Group Ltd CM-CIC Asset Management Colonial First State Global Asset Management Limited Comerica Incorporated COMGEST Commerzbank AG CommInsure Commonwealth Bank of Australia Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation Compton Foundation Concordia Versicherungs-Gesellschaft a.G. Confluence Capital Management LLC Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds Conser Invest Co-operative Financial Services (CFS) Crayna Capital, LLC. Credit Agricole Credit Suisse CTBC Financial Holding Co., Ltd. Daesung Capital Management Daiwa Asset Management Co. Ltd. Daiwa Securities Group Inc. Dalton Nicol Reid Dana Investment Advisors Danske Bank Group de Pury Pictet Turrettini & Cie S.A. DekaBank Deutsche Girozentrale Delta Lloyd Asset Management Demeter Partners Desjardins Group Deutsche Asset Management Investmentgesellschaft mbH Deutsche Bank AG Deutsche Postbank AG Development Bank of Japan Inc. Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) Dexia Asset Management DEXUS Property Group DGB Financial Group DIP DLM INVISTA ASSET MANAGEMENT S/A DNB ASA Domini Social Investments LLC Dongbu Insurance Doughty Hanson & Co. DWS Investment GmbH DZ Bank E.Sun Financial Holding Co Earth Capital Partners LLP East Capital AB East Sussex Pension Fund Ecclesiastical Investment Management Ltd. Ecofi Investissements—Groupe Credit Cooperatif Edward W. Hazen Foundation EEA Group Ltd Eika Kapitalforvaltning AS Eko Elan Capital Partners Element Investment Managers ELETRA—Fundação Celg de Seguros e Previdência Environment Agency Active Pension fund Environmental Investment Services Asia Limited Epworth Investment Management Equilibrium Capital Group equinet Bank AG Erik Penser Fondkommission Erste Asset Management Erste Group Bank Essex Investment Management Company, LLC ESSSuper Ethos Foundation Etica Sgr Eureka Funds Management Eurizon Capital SGR Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada Pension Plan for Clergy and Lay Workers Evangelical Lutheran Foundation of Eastern Canada Evangelisch-Luth. Kirche in Bayern Evli Bank Plc F&C Investments FACEB—FUNDAÇÃO DE PREVIDÊNCIA DOS EMPREGADOS DA CEB FAELCE—Fundacao Coelce de Seguridade Social FAPERS- Fundação Assistencial e Previdenciária da Extensão Rural do Rio Grande do Sul FASERN—Fundação COSERN de Previdência Complementar Federal Finance Fédéris Gestion d’Actifs FIDURA Capital Consult GmbH FIM Asset Management Ltd FIM Services Finance S.A. Financiere de l’Echiquier FIPECq—Fundação de Previdência Complementar dos Empregados e Servidores da FINEP, do IPEA, do CNPq FIRA.—Banco de Mexico First Affirmative Financial Network First Bank First State Investments First State Super First Swedish National Pension Fund (AP1) Firstrand Group Limited Five Oceans Asset Management Folketrygdfondet Folksam Fondaction CSN Fondation de Luxembourg Fondazione Cariplo Fondo Pensione Gruppo Intesa Sanpaolo— FAPA Fonds de Réserve pour les Retraites—FRR Forluz—Fundação Forluminas de Seguridade Social—FORLUZ Forma Futura Invest AG Fourth Swedish National Pension Fund, (AP4) FRANKFURT-TRUST Investment- Gesellschaft mbH Friends Fiduciary Corporation Fubon Financial Holdings Fukoku Capital Management Inc FUNCEF—Fundação dos Economiários Federais Fundação AMPLA de Seguridade Social— Brasiletros Fundação Atlântico de Seguridade Social Fundação Attilio Francisco Xavier Fontana Fundação Banrisul de Seguridade Social Fundação BRDE de Previdência Complementar—ISBRE Fundação Chesf de Assistência e Seguridade Social—Fachesf Fundação Corsan—dos Funcionários da Companhia Riograndense de Saneamento Fundação de Assistência e Previdência Social do BNDES—FAPES FUNDAÇÃO ELETROBRÁS DE SEGURIDADE SOCIAL—ELETROS Fundação Itaipu BR—de Previdência e Assistência Social FUNDAÇÃO ITAUBANCO Fundação Itaúsa Industrial Fundação Promon de Previdência Social Fundação Rede Ferroviaria de Seguridade Social—Refer FUNDAÇÃO SANEPAR DE PREVIDÊNCIA E ASSISTÊNCIA SOCIAL—FUSAN Fundação Sistel de Seguridade Social (Sistel) Fundação Vale do Rio Doce de Seguridade Social—VALIA FUNDIÁGUA—FUNDAÇÃO DE PREVIDENCIA COMPLEMENTAR DA CAESB Futuregrowth Asset Management GameChange Capital LLC Garanti Bank GEAP Fundação de Seguridade Social Gemway Assets General Equity Group AG Generali Deutschland Holding AG Generation Investment Management Genus Capital Management German Equity Trust AG Gjensidige Forsikring ASA Global Forestry Capital SARL Globalance Bank Ltd GLS Gemeinschaftsbank eG Goldman Sachs Group Inc. GOOD GROWTH INSTITUT für globale Vermögensentwicklung mbH Good Super
  • 42.
    42 Governance for Owners GovernmentEmployees Pension Fund (“GEPF”), Republic of South Africa GPT Group Greater Manchester Pension Fund Green Cay Asset Management Green Century Capital Management GROUPAMA EMEKLİLİK A.Ş. GROUPAMA SİGORTA A.Ş. Groupe Crédit Coopératif Groupe Investissement Responsable Inc. GROUPE OFI AM Grupo Financiero Banorte SAB de CV Grupo Santander Brasil Gruppo Bancario Credito Valtellinese Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation Hang Seng Bank Hanwha Asset Management Company Harbour Asset Management Harrington Investments, Inc Harvard Management Company, Inc. Hauck & Aufhäuser Asset Management GmbH Hazel Capital LLP HDFC Bank Ltd. Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP) Heart of England Baptist Association Helaba Invest Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH Henderson Global Investors Hermes Fund Managers—BUT Hermes EOS for Carbon Action HESTA Super HIP Investor Holden & Partners HSBC Global Asset Management (Deutschland) GmbH HSBC Holdings plc HSBC INKA Internationale Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH HUMANIS Hyundai Marine & Fire Insurance Co., Ltd Hyundai Securities Co., Ltd. IBK Securities IDBI Bank Ltd. Illinois State Board of Investment Ilmarinen Mutual Pension Insurance Company Imofundos, S.A Impax Asset Management IndusInd Bank Ltd. Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc. Industrial Bank (A) Industrial Bank of Korea Industrial Development Corporation Industry Funds Management Inflection Point Capital Management Inflection Point Partners Infrastructure Development Finance Company ING Group N.V. Insight Investment Management (Global) Ltd Instituto Infraero de Seguridade Social— INFRAPREV Instituto Sebrae De Seguridade Social— SEBRAEPREV Insurance Australia Group Integre Wealth Management of Raymond James Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility IntReal KAG Investec Asset Management Investing for Good CIC Ltd Investor Environmental Health Network Irish Life Investment Managers Itau Asset Management Itaú Unibanco Holding S A Janus Capital Group Inc. Jarislowsky Fraser Limited Jessie Smith Noyes Foundation Jesuits in Britain JMEPS Trustees Limited JOHNSON & JOHNSON SOCIEDADE PREVIDENCIARIA JPMorgan Chase & Co. Jubitz Family Foundation Jupiter Asset Management Kagiso Asset Management Kaiser Ritter Partner Privatbank AG KB Kookmin Bank KBC Asset Management KBC Group KCPS Private Wealth Management KDB Asset Management Co. Ltd KDB Daewoo Securities Kendall Sustainable Infrastructure, LLC Kepler Cheuvreux KEPLER-FONDS KAG Keva KeyCorp KfW Bankengruppe Killik & Co LLP Kiwi Income Property Trust Kleinwort Benson Investors KlimaINVEST KLP Korea Investment Management Co., Ltd. Korea Technology Finance Corporation (KOTEC) KPA Pension La Banque Postale Asset Management La Financière Responsable La Francaise AM Lampe Asset Management GmbH Landsorganisationen i Sverige LaSalle Investment Management LBBW—Landesbank Baden-Württemberg LBBW Asset Management Investmentgesellschaft mbH LD Lønmodtagernes Dyrtidsfond Legal and General Investment Management Legg Mason Global Asset Management LGT Group LGT Group Foundation LIG Insurance Light Green Advisors, LLC Living Planet Fund Management Company S.A. Lloyds Banking Group Local Authority Pension Fund Forum Local Government Super Logos portföy Yönetimi A.Ş. London Pensions Fund Authority Lothian Pension Fund LUCRF Super Lutheran Council of Great Britain Macquarie Group Limited MagNet Magyar Közösségi Bank Zrt. MainFirst Bank AG Making Dreams a Reality Financial Planning Malakoff Médéric MAMA Sustainable Incubation AG Man Mandarine Gestion MAPFRE Maple-Brown Abbott Marc J. Lane Investment Management, Inc. Maryknoll Sisters Maryland State Treasurer Matrix Asset Management MATRIX GROUP LTD McLean Budden MEAG MUNICH ERGO AssetManagement GmbH Mediobanca Meeschaert Gestion Privée Meiji Yasuda Life Insurance Company Mendesprev Sociedade Previdenciária Merck Family Fund Mercy Investment Services, Inc. Mergence Investment Managers MetallRente GmbH Metrus—Instituto de Seguridade Social Metzler Asset Management Gmbh MFS Investment Management Midas International Asset Management, Ltd. Miller/Howard Investments, Inc. Mirae Asset Global Investments Mirae Asset Securities Co., Ltd. Mirova Mirvac Group Ltd Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate Mistra, Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co.,Ltd Mizuho Financial Group, Inc. MN Mobimo Holding AG Momentum Manager of Managers (Pty) Limited Momentum Manager of Managers (Pty) Ltd Monega Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH Mongeral Aegon Seguros e Previdência S/A Morgan Stanley Mountain Cleantech AG MTAA Superannuation Fund Munich Re Appendix III Investor signatories
  • 43.
    43 Mutual Insurance CompanyPension-Fennia Nanuk Asset Management Natcan Investment Management Nathan Cummings Foundation, The National Australia Bank Limited National Bank of Canada NATIONAL BANK OF GREECE S.A. National Grid Electricity Group of the Electricity Supply Pension Scheme National Grid UK Pension Scheme National Pensions Reserve Fund of Ireland National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) Nativus Sustainable Investments NATIXIS Natural Investments LLC Nedbank Limited Needmor Fund NEI Investments Nelson Capital Management, LLC Nest Sammelstiftung Neuberger Berman New Alternatives Fund Inc. New Amsterdam Partners LLC New Forests New Mexico State Treasurer New Resource Bank New York City Employees Retirement System New York City Teachers Retirement System New York State Common Retirement Fund (NYSCRF) Newground Social Investment Newton Investment Management Limited NGS Super NH-CA Asset Management Company Nikko Asset Management Co., Ltd. Nipponkoa Insurance Company, Ltd Nissay Asset Management Corporation NORD/LB Kapitalanlagegesellschaft AG Nordea Investment Management Norfolk Pension Fund Norges Bank Investment Management North Carolina Retirement System Northern Ireland Local Government Officers’ Superannuation Committee (NILGOSC) NORTHERN STAR GROUP Northern Trust NorthStar Asset Management, Inc Northward Capital Pty Ltd Nykredit OceanRock Investments Oddo & Cie oeco capital Lebensversicherung AG ÖKOWORLD Old Mutual plc OMERS Administration Corporation Ontario Pension Board Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan OP Fund Management Company Ltd Oppenheim & Co. Limited Oppenheim Fonds Trust GmbH Opplysningsvesenets fond (The Norwegian Church Endowment) OPTrust Oregon State Treasurer Orion Energy Systems Osmosis Investment Management Panahpur Park Foundation Parnassus Investments Pax World Funds Pensioenfonds Vervoer Pension Denmark Pension Fund for Danish Lawyers and Economists Pension Protection Fund People’s Choice Credit Union Perpetual PETROS—The Fundação Petrobras de Seguridade Social PFA Pension PGGM Vermogensbeheer Phillips, Hager & North Investment Management PhiTrust Active Investors Pictet Asset Management SA Pinstripe Management GmbH Pioneer Investments PIRAEUS BANK PKA Pluris Sustainable Investments SA PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. Pohjola Asset Management Ltd Polden-Puckham Charitable Foundation Portfolio 21 Porto Seguro S.A. POSTALIS—Instituto de Seguridade Social dos Correios e Telégrafos Power Finance Corporation Limited PREVHAB PREVIDÊNCIA COMPLEMENTAR PREVI Caixa de Previdência dos Funcionários do Banco do Brasil PREVIG Sociedade de Previdência Complementar Prius Partners Progressive Asset Management, Inc. Prologis Provinzial Rheinland Holding Prudential Investment Management Prudential Plc Psagot Investment House Ltd Public Sector Pension Investment Board Q Capital Partners Co. Ltd QBE Insurance Group Quilter Cheviot Asset Management Quotient Investors Rabobank Raiffeisen Fund Management Hungary Ltd. Raiffeisen Kapitalanlage-Gesellschaft m.b.H. Raiffeisen Schweiz Genossenschaft Rathbones / Rathbone Greenbank Investments RCM (Allianz Global Investors) Real Grandeza Fundação de Previdência e Assistência Social REI Super Appendix III Investor signatories Reliance Capital Limited Representative Body of the Church in Wales Resolution Resona Bank, Limited Reynders McVeigh Capital Management River Twice Capital Advisors, LLC Robeco RobecoSAM AG Robert & Patricia Switzer Foundation Rockefeller Asset Management, Sustainability & Impact Investing Group Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment Rothschild & Cie Gestion Group Royal Bank of Canada Royal Bank of Scotland Group Royal London Asset Management RPMI Railpen Investments RREEF Investment GmbH Russell Investments Sampension KP Livsforsikring A/S Samsung Asset Management Co., Ltd. Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Co.,Ltd., Samsung Securities Samsunglife Insurance Sanlam Life Insurance Ltd Santa Fé Portfolios Ltda Santam Sarasin & Cie AG Sarasin & Partners SAS Trustee Corporation Sauren Finanzdienstleistungen GmbH & Co. KG Schroders Scotiabank Scottish Widows Investment Partnership SEB Second Swedish National Pension Fund (AP2) Şekerbank T.A.Ş. Seligson & Co Fund Management Plc Sentinel Investments SERPROS—Fundo Multipatrocinado Service Employees International Union Pension Fund Servite Friars Seventh Swedish National Pension Fund (AP7) Shinhan Bank Shinhan BNP Paribas Investment Trust Management Co., Ltd Shinkin Asset Management Co., Ltd Siemens Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH Signet Capital Management Ltd Sisters of St Francis of Philadelphia Sisters of St. Dominic Skandia Smith Pierce, LLC SNS Asset Management Social(k) Sociedade de Previdencia Complementar da Dataprev—Prevdata Società reale mutua di assicurazioni Socrates Fund Management
  • 44.
    44 Appendix III Investor signatories SolarisInvestment Management Limited Sompo Japan Nipponkoa Holdings, Inc Sonen Capital Sopher Investment Management Soprise! Impact Fund SouthPeak Investment Management SPF Beheer bv Spring Water Asset Management Sprucegrove Investment Management Ltd Standard Chartered Standard Chartered Korea Limited Standard Life Investments Standish Mellon Asset Management State Bank of India State Board of Administration (SBA) of Florida State Street Corporation StatewideSuper Stockland Storebrand ASA Strathclyde Pension Fund Stratus Group Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Holdings, Inc. Sun Life Financial Superfund Asset Management GmbH SURA Peru (AFP Integra, Seguros SURA, Fondos SURA, Hipotecaria SURA) SUSI Partners AG Sustainable Capital Sustainable Development Capital Sustainable Insight Capital Management Svenska kyrkan Svenska kyrkans pensionskassa Swedbank AB Swedish Pensions Agency Swift Foundation Swiss Re Swisscanto Asset Management AG Sycomore Asset Management Syntrus Achmea Asset Management T. Rowe Price T. SINAİ KALKINMA BANKASI A.Ş. Tata Capital Limited TD Asset Management (TD Asset Management Inc. and TDAM USA Inc.) Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association—College Retirement Equities Fund Telluride Association Telstra Super Tempis Asset Management Co. Ltd Terra Global Capital, LLC TerraVerde Capital Management LLC TfL Pension Fund The ASB Community Trust The Brainerd Foundation The Bullitt Foundation The Central Church Fund of Finland The Children’s Investment Fund Management (UK) LLP The Collins Foundation The Co-operative Asset Management The Co-operators Group Ltd The Council of Lutheran Churches The Daly Foundation The Environmental Investment Partnership LLP The Hartford Financial Services Group The Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust The Korea Teachers Pension (KTP) The New School The Oppenheimer Group The Pension Plan For Employees of the Public Service Alliance of Canada The Pinch Group The Presbyterian Church in Canada The Russell Family Foundation The Sandy River Charitable Foundation The Shiga Bank, Ltd. The Sisters of St. Ann The Sustainability Group at the Loring, Wolcott & Coolidge Office The United Church of Canada—General Council The University of Edinburgh Endowment Fund The Wellcome Trust Third Swedish National Pension Fund (AP3) Threadneedle Asset Management TOBAM Tokio Marine Holdings, Inc Toronto Atmospheric Fund Trillium Asset Management, LLC Triodos Investment Management Tri-State Coalition for Responsible Investment Trust Waikato Trusteam Finance Trustees of Donations to the Protestant Episcopal Church Tryg Turner Investments UBS UniCredit SpA Union Asset Management Holding AG Union Investment Privatfonds GmbH Unione di Banche Italiane S.c.p.a. Unionen Unipension Fondsmaeglerselskab A/S UNISONS Staff Pension Scheme UniSuper Unitarian Universalist Association United Church Funds United Nations Foundation Unity College Unity Trust Bank Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS) Van Lanschot Vancity Group of Companies VCH Vermögensverwaltung AG Ventas, Inc. Veris Wealth Partners Veritas Investment Trust GmbH Vermont State Treasurer Vexiom Capital Group, Inc. VicSuper Victorian Funds Management Corporation VietNam Holding Ltd. Vinva Investment Management VOIGT & COLL. GMBH VOLKSBANK INVESTMENTS Walden Asset Management WARBURG—HENDERSON Kapitalanlagegesellschaft für Immobilien mbH WARBURG INVEST KAPITALANLAGEGESELLSCHAFT MBH Water Asset Management, LLC Wells Fargo & Company Wespath Investment Management West Midlands Pension Fund West Yorkshire Pension Fund Westfield Capital Management Company, LP WestLB Mellon Asset Management (WMAM) Westpac Banking Corporation WHEB Asset Management White Owl Capital AG Wisconsin, Iowa, & Minnesota Coalition for Responsible Investment Woori Bank Woori Investment & Securities Co., Ltd. YES BANK Ltd. York University Pension Fund Youville Provident Fund Inc. Zegora Investment Management Zevin Asset Management, LLC Zürcher Kantonalbank
  • 46.
    CDP Contacts Paul Dickinson ExecutiveChairman Paul Simpson Chief Executive Officer Frances Way Co-Chief Operating Officer Sue Howells Co-Chief Operating Officer Marcus Norton Chief Partnerships Officer Daniel Turner Head of Disclosure James Hulse Head of Investor Initiatives CDP Head Office 40 Bowling Green Lane London EC1R 0NE United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)20 7970 5660 @cdp www.cdp.net [email protected] CDP Board of Trustees Chairman: Alan Brown Wellcome Trust James Cameron Climate Change Capital & ODI Ben Goldsmith WHEB Chris Page Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Jeremy Smith Takejiro Sueyoshi Tessa Tennant Martin Wise Relationship Capital Partners CDP Advisors Lord Adair Turner Rear Admiral Neil Morisetti CB Global Implementation Partner Design thestellardesign.com stellar design stellar Stellar Design information | graphics | truth stellar designvisualizing truth stellar desivisual truth stellar designvisualising truth stellar designvisualizing truth stellar designvisualizing truth stellar designvisualising truth stellar design For access to a database of public responses for analysis, benchmarking and learning best practices, please contact [email protected]. This report is available for download from www.cdp.net.