Guidance 07 Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
After a company has identified the activities to include in its scope 3 boundary, the next step is to collect the necessary data to calculate the company’s scope 3 emissions.
Collecting data in Scope 3 projects is likely to require wider engagement within the reporting company, as well as with suppliers and partners outside of the company, than is needed to collect scope 1 and scope 2 emissions data. Companies may need to engage several internal departments, such as procurement, energy, manufacturing, marketing, research and development, product design, logistics, and accounting.
This chapter provides a four-step approach to collecting and evaluating data (see figure 7.1).
Guidance for calculating scope 3 emissions from each scope 3 category is provided in a separate document, Guidance for Calculating Scope 3 Emissions, which is available at www.ghgprotocol.org.
7.1 Guidance for prioritizing data collection efforts
Companies should prioritize data collection efforts on the scope 3 activities that are expected to have the most significant GHG emissions, offer the most significant GHG reduction opportunities, and are most relevant to the company’s business goals.
Collecting higher quality data for priority activities allows companies to focus resources on the most significant GHG emissions in the value chain, more effectively set reduction targets, and track and demonstrate GHG reductions over time (see chapter 9 Setting a GHG Reduction Target and Tracking Emissions Over Time).
Companies may use a combination of approaches and criteria to identify priority activities. For example, companies may seek higher quality data for all activities that are significant in size, activities that present the most significant risks and opportunities in the value chain, and activities where more accurate data can be easily obtained.
Companies may choose to rely on relatively less accurate data for activities that are expected to have insignificant emissions or where accurate data is difficult to obtain. (See Appendix C for guidance on developing a data management plan, including strategies for obtaining more accurate data over time).
Prioritizing activities based on the magnitude of GHG emissions
The most rigorous approach to identifying priority activities is to use initial GHG estimation (or screening) methods to determine which scope 3 activities are expected to be most significant in size. A quantitative approach gives the most accurate understanding of the relative magnitudes of various scope 3 activities.
To prioritize activities based on their expected GHG emissions, companies should:
- use initial GHG estimation (or screening) methods to estimate the emissions from each scope 3 activity (e.g., by using industry-average data, environmentally extended input output data (see Box 7.1 ‘Environmentally-extended input output (EEIO) models‘ below), proxy data, or rough estimates); and
- rank all scope 3 activities from largest to smallest according to their estimated GHG emissions to determine which scope 3 activities have the most significant impact.
Box 7.1 Environmentally-extended input output (EEIO) models |
Environmentally-extended input output (EEIO) models estimate energy use and/or GHG emissions resulting from the production and upstream supply chain activities of different sectors and products within an economy. The resulting EEIO emissions factors can be used to estimate GHG emissions for a given industry or product category. EEIO data are particularly useful in screening emission sources when prioritizing data collection efforts. EEIO models are derived by allocating national GHG emissions to groups of finished products based on economic flows between industry sectors. EEIO models vary in the number of sectors and products included and how often they are updated. EEIO data are often comprehensive, but the level of granularity is relatively low compared to other sources of data. |
Calculation methods for each scope 3 category that can be used for screening are provided in a separate document, Guidance for Calculating Scope 3 Emissions, which is available at www.ghgprotocol.org.
Prioritizing activities based on financial spend or revenue
As an alternative to ranking scope 3 activities based on their estimated GHG emissions, companies may choose to prioritize scope 3 activities based on their relative financial significance. Companies may use a financial spend analysis to rank upstream types of purchased products by their contribution to the company’s total spend or expenditure (for an example, see the AkzoNobel case study, below).
AkzoNobel: Prioritizing scope 3 emissions from purchased goods and services |
AkzoNobel, the largest global paints and coatings company and a major producer of specialty chemicals, applied a financial spend analysis to prioritize its purchased goods and services before collecting data for category 1. In three representative businesses used, AkzoNobel set out to identify the purchased goods and services that collectively accounted for at least 80% of the total spend, as well as any category in the remaining 20% that was individually more than 1% of total spend. The graph below illustrates the results of a financial spend analysis for one of AkzoNobel’s businesses. Based on the analysis, AkzoNobel focused data collection efforts on the raw materials that represented over 95% of total spend, marked in the graph. AkzoNobel focused data collection efforts on the raw materials that represented over 95 percent of total spend.
|
For downstream emissions, companies may likewise rank types of sold products by their contribution to the company’s total revenue.
Companies should use caution in prioritizing activities based on financial contribution, because spend and revenue may not correlate well with emissions. For example, some activities have a high market value, but have relatively low emissions. Conversely, some activities have a low market value, but have relatively high emissions.
As a result, companies should also prioritize activities that do not contribute significantly to financial spend or revenue, but are expected to have a significant GHG impact.
Prioritizing activities based on other criteria In addition to prioritizing data collection efforts on activities expected to contribute significantly to total scope 3 emissions or to spend, companies may prioritize any other activities expected to be most relevant for the company or its stakeholders, including activities that:
- the company has influence over;
- contribute to the company’s risk exposure;
- stakeholders deem critical;
- have been identified as significant by sector-specific guidance; or
- meet any additional criteria developed by the company or industry sector (see table 6.1 for more information).
To prioritize scope 3 activities, companies may also assess whether any GHG- or energy-intensive materials or activities appear in the value chain of purchased and sold products.
7.2 Overview of quantification methods and data types
There are two main methods to quantify emissions: direct measurement and calculation (see table table 7.1 ‘Quantification methods‘ below). Each requires different types of data.
Table 7.1 Quantification methods |
||
Quantification method |
Description |
Relevant data types |
Direct measurement |
Quantification of GHG emissions using direct monitoring, mass balance or stoichiometry GHG = Emissions Data x GWP |
Direct emissions data |
Calculation |
Quantification of GHG emissions by multiplying activity data by an emission factor GHG = Activity Data x Emission Factor x GWP |
Activity data Emission factors |
In practice, calculation will be used most often to quantify scope 3 emissions, which requires the use of two types of data: activity data and emission factors.
Activity data
Activity data is a quantitative measure of a level of activity that results in GHG emissions. Examples of activity data are provided in the table below.
Emission factors
An emission factor is a factor that converts activity data into GHG emissions data. Examples of emission factors are provided also in table 7.2.
Table [7.2] Examples of activity data and emission factors |
|
Examples of activity data |
Examples of emission factors |
|
|
Companies are required to report a description of the types and sources of activity data and emission factors used to calculate the inventory (see chapter 11 Reporting).
Energy emission factors
Two types of emission factors are used to convert energy activity data into emissions data:
- Combustion emission factors, which include only the emissions that occur from combusting the fuel
- Life cycle emission factors, which include not only the emissions that occur from combusting the fuel, but all other emissions that occur in the life cycle of the fuel such as emissions from extraction, processing, and transportation of fuels
Combustion emission factors are used in the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard to calculate scope 1 emissions (in the case of fuels) and scope 2 emissions (in the case of electricity).
Life cycle emission factors are used in the GHG Protocol Product Standard to calculate emissions from fuels and electricity. These two types of emission factors and their use are described in more detail below.
Energy emission factors in scope 1 and scope 2 accounting
Scope 1 and scope 2 emissions are calculated using combustion emission factors following the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard. Scope 1 and scope 2 are defined to avoid double counting by two or more companies of the same emission within the same scope (see table 5.1 Overview of scopes).
Table 5.1 Overview of the scopes |
|||
Emissions type |
Scope |
Definition |
Examples |
Direct emissions |
Scope 1 |
Emissions from operations that are owned or controlled by the reporting company |
Emissions from combustion in owned or controlled boilers, furnaces, vehicles, etc.; emissions from chemical production in owned or controlled process equipment |
Indirect emissions |
Scope 2 |
Emissions from the generation of purchased or acquired electricity, steam, heating, or cooling consumed by the reporting company |
Use of purchased electricity, steam, heating, or cooling |
Scope 3 |
All indirect emissions (not included in scope 2) that occur in the value chain of the reporting company, including both upstream and downstream emissions |
Production of purchased products, transportation of purchased products, or use of sold products |
Scope 2 includes emissions from the generation of purchased electricity, steam, heating, and cooling that is consumed by the reporting company. In some regions, electricity emission factors may include life cycle activities related to electricity, such as transmission and distribution of electricity, or extraction, processing and transportation of fuels used to generate electricity.
Non-generation activities related to electricity are accounted for in scope 3, category 3 (Fuel- and energy-related activities not included in scope 1 or scope 2), rather than scope 2.
As a result, companies should seek (and emission factor developers should provide) transparent, disaggregated electricity emission factors that allow separate accounting of emissions from electricity generation in scope 2 and non-generation activities related to electricity in scope 3.
Proper accounting creates consistency in scope 2 accounting and reporting between companies and avoids double counting of the same emission within scope 2 by more than one company. See figure 7.2 for more information on different types of electricity emission factors.
Energy emission factors in scope 3 accounting
Companies should use life cycle emission factors to calculate scope 3 emissions related to fuels and energy consumed in the reporting company’s value chain, except for category 3 (fuel- and energy-related activities not included in scope 1 or scope 2) (see below).
Compared to combustion emission factors, life cycle emission factors represent all emissions in the upstream supply chain of fuels and energy. Where possible, companies should use life cycle emission factors that are as specific as possible to the type and source of fuel consumed (e.g., specific to the technology used to produce a fuel).
Two activities within category 3 require special consideration when selecting emission factors:
- Upstream emissions of purchased fuels (i.e., extraction, production, and transportation of fuels consumed by the reporting company)
- Upstream emissions of purchased electricity (i.e., extraction, production, and transportation of fuels consumed in the generation of electricity, steam, heating, and cooling that is consumed by the reporting company)
To calculate emissions from these activities, companies should use life cycle emission factors that exclude emissions from combustion, since emissions from combustion are accounted for in scope 1 (in the case of fuels), in scope 2 (in the case of electricity), and in a separate memo item (in the case of direct CO2 emissions from combustion of biomass or biofuels).
Global warming potential (GWP) values
Global warming potential (GWP) values describe the radiative forcing impact (or degree of harm to the atmosphere) of one unit of a given GHG relative to one unit of carbon dioxide. GWP values convert GHG emissions data for non-CO2 gases into units of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e).
Companies should use GWP values provided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) based on a 100-year time horizon. Companies may either use the IPCC GWP values agreed to by United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) or the most recent GWP values published by the IPCC.
Companies should use consistent GWP values across their scope 1, scope 2, and scope 3 inventory and should maintain consistency in the source of GWP values used over time (by consistently following guidance provided by either the UNFCCC or IPCC, once selected).
Companies that have already developed scope 1 and scope 2 GHG inventories should use the same GWP values for scope 3 to maintain consistency across the scopes.
Companies that have not previously developed a corporate GHG inventory should use the most recent GWP values. Companies are required to disclose the source of GWP values used to calculate the inventory (see chapter 11).
Overview of primary data and secondary data
Companies may use two types of data to calculate scope 3 emissions: Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
- Primary data Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
- Secondary data Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
The table 7.3 provides definitions of these two types of data.
Table [7.3] Types of data |
|
Data type |
Description |
Primary Data |
Data from specific activities within a company’s value chain |
Secondary Data |
Data that is not from specific activities within a company’s value chain |
Primary data includes data provided by suppliers or other value chain partners related to specific activities in the reporting company’s value chain. Such data may take the form of primary activity data, or emissions data calculated by suppliers that are specific to suppliers’ activities. Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
Secondary data includes industry-average data (e.g., from published databases, government statistics, literature studies, and industry associations), financial data, proxy data, and other generic data. In certain cases, companies may use specific data from one activity in the value chain to estimate emissions for another activity in the value chain.
This type of data (i.e., proxy data) is considered secondary data, since it is not specific to the activity whose emissions are being calculated. Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
The following table provides examples of primary and secondary data by scope 3 category. Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
7.3 Guidance for selecting data
The quality of the scope 3 inventory depends on the quality of the data used to calculate emissions. Companies should collect data of sufficient quality to ensure that the inventory appropriately reflects the GHG emissions of the company, supports the company’s goals, and serves the decision-making needs of users, both internal and external to the company.
After prioritizing scope 3 activities (see section 7.1), companies should select data based on the following:
- The company’s business goals (see chapter 2) Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
- The relative significance of scope 3 activities (see section 7.1) Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
- The availability of primary and secondary data Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
- The quality of available data Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
Companies may use any combination of primary and secondary data to calculate scope 3 emissions. See table 7.5 for a list of advantages and disadvantages of primary data and secondary data.
Table [7.5] Advantages and disadvantages of primary data and secondary data |
||
Primary data |
Secondary data |
|
Advantages Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects |
|
Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects |
Disadvantages Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects |
Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects |
|
In general, companies should collect high quality, primary data for high priority activities (see section 7.1). To most effectively track performance, companies should use primary data collected from suppliers and other value chain partners for scope 3 activities targeted for achieving GHG reductions.
In some cases, primary data may not be available or may not be of sufficient quality. In such cases, secondary data may be of higher quality than the available primary data for a given activity. Data selection depends on business goals. If the company’s main goal is to set GHG reduction targets, track performance from specific operations within the value chain, or engage suppliers, the company should select primary data.
If the company’s main goal is to understand the relative magnitude of various scope 3 activities, identify hot spots, and prioritize efforts in primary data collection, the company should select secondary data. In general, companies should collect secondary data for:
- Activities not prioritized based on initial estimation methods or other criteria (see section 7.1)
- Activities for which primary data is not available (e.g., where a value chain partner is unable to provide data)
- Activities for which the quality of secondary data is higher than primary data (e.g., when a value chain partner is unable to provide data of sufficient quality1)
Companies are required to report a description of the types and sources of data (including activity data, emission factors, and GWP values) used to calculate emissions, and the percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or other value chain partners (see chapter 11).
Data quality
Sources of primary data and secondary data can vary in quality. When selecting data sources, companies should use the data quality indicators in table 7.6 as a guide to obtaining the highest quality data available for a given emissions activity. The data quality indicators describe the representativeness of data (in terms of technology, time, and geography) and the quality of data measurements (i.e., completeness and reliability of data).
Table 7.6 Data quality indicators |
|
Indicator |
Description |
Technological representativeness |
The degree to which the data set reflects the actual technology(ies) used |
Temporal representativeness |
The degree to which the data set reflects the actual time (e.g., year) or age of the activity |
Geographical representativeness |
The degree to which the data set reflects the actual geographic location of the activity (e.g., country or site) |
Completeness |
The degree to which the data is statistically representative of the relevant activity. Completeness includes the percentage of locations for which data is available and used out of the total number that relate to a specific activity. Completeness also addresses seasonal and other normal fluctuations in data. |
Reliability |
The degree to which the sources, data collection methods and verification procedures2 used to obtain the data are dependable. |
Adapted from B.P. Weidema and M.S. Wesnaes, “Data quality management for life cycle inventories – an example of using data quality indicators,” Journal of Cleaner Production 4 no. 3-4 (1996): 167-174.
Companies should select data that are the most representative in terms of technology, time, and geography; most complete; and most reliable.
Companies should determine the most useful method for applying the data quality indicators when selecting data and evaluating data quality. One example of applying the data quality indicators is presented in box 7.2:
Box 7.2 Example of criteria to evaluate the data quality indicators |
A qualitative approach to data quality assessment uses rating descriptions for each of the data quality indicators on direct emissions data, activity data, and emission factors as applicable. This rating system has elements of subjectivity. For example, some fuel emission factors have not changed significantly in many years. Therefore, a fuel emission factor that is over 10 years old, which would be assigned a temporal score of poor with the data quality in the table below, may not be different than a factor less than 6 years old (a temporal rating of good). Companies should consider the individual circumstances of the data when using the data quality results as a basis for collecting new data or evaluating data quality. Notes: Adapted from B.P. Weidema and M.S. Wesnaes, “Data quality management for life cycle inventories – an example of using data quality indicators,” Journal of Cleaner Production 4 no. 3-4 (1996): 167-174. |
To ensure transparency and avoid misinterpretation of data, companies are required to report a description of the data quality of reported emissions data (see chapter 11).
Because scope 3 emissions are emissions from activities not under the reporting company’s ownership or control, companies are likely to face additional challenges related to collecting data and ensuring data quality for scope 3 than for activities under the reporting company’s ownership or control. Scope 3 data collection challenges include:
- Reliance on value chain partners to provide data
- Lesser degree of influence over data collection and management practices
- Lesser degree of knowledge about data types, data sources, and data quality
- Broader need for secondary data
- Broader need for assumptions and modeling
These data collection challenges contribute to uncertainty in scope 3 accounting. Higher uncertainty for scope 3 calculations is acceptable as long as the data quality of the inventory is sufficient to support the company’s goals and ensures that the scope 3 inventory is relevant (i.e., the inventory appropriately reflects the GHG emissions of the company, and serves the decision-making needs of users, both internal and external to the company).
For example, companies may seek to ensure that data quality is sufficient to understand the relative magnitude of scope 3 activities across the value chain and to enable consistent tracking of scope 3 emissions over time. See Appendix B for more information on uncertainty.
To facilitate quality assurance and quality control when collecting data, companies should develop a data management plan that documents the GHG inventory process and the internal quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedures in place to enable the preparation of the inventory from its inception through final reporting. For more information, see Appendix C.
Companies should select data that are the most representative in terms of technology, time, and geography; most complete; and most reliable.
7.4 Guidance for collecting primary data
Primary activity data may be obtained through meter readings, purchase records, utility bills, engineering models, direct monitoring, mass balance, stoichiometry, or other methods for obtaining data from specific activities in the company’s value chain.
Where possible, companies should collect energy or emissions data from suppliers and other value chain partners in order to obtain site-specific data for priority scope 3 categories and activities. To do so, companies should identify relevant suppliers from which to seek GHG data.
Suppliers may include contract manufacturers, materials and parts suppliers, capital equipment suppliers, fuel suppliers, third party logistics providers, waste management companies, and other companies that provide goods and services to the reporting company.
Companies should first engage relevant tier 1 suppliers (see figure 7.3). Tier 1 suppliers are companies with which the reporting company has a purchase order for goods or services (e.g., materials, parts, components, etc.). Tier 1 suppliers have contractual obligations with the reporting company, providing the leverage needed to request GHG inventory data.
To be comprehensive, companies may seek to obtain GHG emissions data from all tier 1 suppliers. However, a company may have many small tier 1 suppliers that together comprise only a small share of a company’s total activities and spending. Companies may develop their own policy for selecting relevant suppliers to target for primary data collection. For example, a company may select suppliers based on their contribution to its total spend (see below box 7.3).
Box 7.3 Example of prioritizing suppliers based on contribution to the company’s total spend |
As an example, a company may prioritize suppliers by following these steps:
In this example, A-Z represent individual suppliers. The company selects suppliers A through I because they collectively account for 80 percent of the company’s spend. The company also selects supplier J because it individually represents more than 1 percent of supplier spend. The company uses secondary data to calculate emissions from activities where supplier-specific data is not collected or is incomplete. |
A company may also seek data from tier 2 suppliers, where relevant:
Box 7.5 Expanding supplier GHG management beyond tier 1 suppliers |
While companies should first engage tier 1 suppliers, significant value chain GHG impacts often lie upstream of a company’s tier 1 suppliers. Tier 1 suppliers may outsource manufacturing or be several layers removed from the most GHG-intensive operations in a supply chain (e.g., raw material extraction or manufacturing). As a result, companies may want to promote further proliferation of GHG management throughout the supply chain. As tier 1 data is gathered, companies may consider whether and how to approach deeper levels of the supply chain. Possible approaches include:
Cascading GHG accounting and reporting throughout supply chains expands the number of companies directly involved in managing GHG emissions. Companies undertaking supply chain engagement efforts may optionally provide information about such efforts in the public report (see chapter 11). |
Tier 2 suppliers are companies with which tier 1 suppliers have a purchase order for goods and services (see figure 7.3 below).
Companies should use secondary data to calculate emissions from activities where supplier-specific data is not collected or is incomplete.
Companies are required to report the percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or other value chain partners (see chapter 11).
It is unlikely that all of a company’s relevant suppliers will be able to provide GHG inventory data to the company. (See table 7.8 for a list of challenges and guidance for collecting primary data from suppliers.)
In such cases, companies should encourage suppliers to develop GHG inventories in the future and may communicate their efforts to encourage more suppliers to provide GHG emissions data in the public report.
After selecting relevant suppliers, companies should determine the type and level of data to request from suppliers.
Collecting data in Scope 3 projects – Type of data
The type of data that should be collected varies by scope 3 category. For example, companies may send questionnaires to each relevant supplier or other value chain partner requesting the following items:
- Product life cycle GHG emissions data following the GHG Protocol Product Standard
- Scope 1 and scope 2 emissions data4 for the reporting year5 following the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard and according to the hierarchy provided in the table 7.7:
Table 7.7 Levels of data (ranked in order of specificity) |
||
Data type |
Description |
|
Product-level data |
Cradle-to-gate6 GHG emissions for the product of interest |
|
Activity-, process- or production line-level data |
GHG emissions and/or activity data for the activities, processes, or production lines that produce the product of interest |
|
Facility-level data |
GHG emissions and/or activity data for the facilities or operations that produce the product of interest |
|
Business unit-level data |
GHG emissions and/or activity data for the business units that produce the product of interest |
|
Corporate-level data |
GHG emissions and/or activity data for the entire corporation |
- The supplier’s upstream scope 3 emissions and/or the types of activities that occur upstream of the supplier (if applicable)
- A description of the methodologies used to quantify emissions and a description of the data sources used (including emission factors and GWP values)7
- The method(s) the supplier used to allocate emissions, or information the reporting company would need to allocate emissions (see chapter 8)
- Whether the data has been assured/verified, and if so, the type of assurance achieved
- Any other relevant information
For more information on types of data to collect by scope 3 category, see the GHG Protocol Guidance for Calculating Scope 3 Emissions, available at www.ghgprotocol.org.
Collecting data in Scope 3 projects – Level of data
Activity data and emissions data may be collected at varying levels of detail and granularity. When collecting primary data from value chain partners, companies should obtain the most product-specific data available (see table 7.7).
Table 7.7 Levels of data (ranked in order of specificity) |
|
Data type |
Description |
Product-level data |
Cradle-to-gate8 GHG emissions for the product of interest |
Activity-, process- or production line-level data |
GHG emissions and/or activity data for the activities, processes, or production lines that produce the product of interest |
Facility-level data |
GHG emissions and/or activity data for the facilities or operations that produce the product of interest |
Business unit-level data |
GHG emissions and/or activity data for the business units that produce the product of interest |
Corporate-level data |
GHG emissions and/or activity data for the entire corporation |
Product-level data is more precise because it relates to the specific good or service purchased by the reporting company and avoids the need for allocation (see chapter 8).
In general, companies should seek activity data or emissions data from suppliers that is as specific as possible to the product purchased from the supplier, following the hierarchy in the above table ‘Levels of data (ranked in order of specificity)‘.
If product-level data is not available, suppliers should try to provide data at the activity-, process-, or production line-level. If activity-level data is not available, suppliers should try to provide data at the facility level, and so on. Collecting more granular data is especially important from diversified suppliers that produce a wide variety of products (see box 7.4).
Box 7.4 Level of data and supplier type |
The need to collect granular data from a supplier depends in part on the variety and diversity of products the supplier produces. Collecting data at the product, production line, or facility level is more important for diversified companies than for relatively homogeneous companies, for which business unit- or corporate-level data may yield representative GHG estimates. Below are two examples:
The reporting company purchases the same type of professional services from both suppliers. The reporting company needs to decide whether collecting corporate-level emissions from the suppliers will accurately reflect emissions related to the purchased product. The company makes a qualitative determination based on the nature of each supplier’s business activities. For Supplier A, the reporting company decides to use corporate level data to estimate emissions from the purchased service because the supplier only produces professional services, each of which has a similar GHG intensity. For Supplier B, however, the reporting company decides not to use corporate-level emissions data because the company is diversified and has business units in both professional services and manufacturing, which have widely different GHG intensities. As a result, using corporate-level data would not accurately reflect emissions from the purchased service. More granular data (e.g., facility- or business unit-level data) should be used instead. |
Data collected at the activity, production line, facility, business unit, or corporate level may require allocation. (For guidance, see chapter 8.)
For more guidance on collecting primary data from suppliers, see Guidance for Collecting Data from Suppliers, available at www.ghgprotocol.org.
Collecting data in Scope 3 projects – Quality of supplier data
The quality of supplier data may vary widely and be difficult to determine. Suppliers should use the data-quality indicators in section 7.3 to select data that are most representative of their activities in terms of technology, time, and geography, and that are the most complete and reliable.
Reporting companies should use the data-quality indicators to assess the quality of suppliers’ data. To do so, companies should request that suppliers provide supporting documentation to explain their methodology and the sources and quality of data used. Companies may request that suppliers perform first party or third party assurance of their data to ensure its accuracy and completeness (see chapter 10).
See the table 7.8 for a list of challenges and guidance for collecting primary data from suppliers.
7.5 Guidance for collecting secondary data and filling data gaps
Collecting secondary data
When using secondary databases, companies should prioritize databases and publications that are internationally recognized, provided by national governments, or peer-reviewed. Companies should
use the data-quality indicators in section 7.3 when selecting secondary data sources. The data-quality indicators should be used to select secondary data that are the most representative to the company’s activities in terms of technology, time, and geography, and that are the most complete and reliable.
A list of available secondary data sources is available at www.ghgprotocol.org.
Using proxy data to fill data gaps
Companies should use the guidance in section 7.3 to assess the quality of available data. If data of sufficient quality are not available, companies may use proxy data to fill data gaps. Proxy data is data from a similar activity that is used as a stand-in for the given activity.
Proxy data can be extrapolated, scaled up, or customized to be more representative of the given activity (e.g., partial data for an activity that is extrapolated or scaled up to represent 100 percent of the activity).
Examples of proxy data include:
- An emission factor exists for electricity in Ukraine, but not for Moldova. A company uses the electricity emission factor from Ukraine as a proxy for electricity in Moldova.
- A company collects data for 80 percent of its production for a given product category, but 20 percent is unknown. The company assumes the unknown 20 percent has similar characteristics to the known 80 percent so applies a linear extrapolation to estimate 100 percent of the production data.
7.6 Improving data quality over time
Collecting data, assessing data quality, and improving data quality is an iterative process. Companies should first apply data quality indicators and assess data quality when selecting data sources (see section 7.3), then review the quality of data used in the inventory after data has been collected, using the same data quality assessment approach. In the initial years of scope 3 data collection, companies may need to use data of relatively low quality due to limited data availability.
Over time, companies should seek to improve the data quality of the inventory by replacing lower quality data with higher quality data as it becomes available. In particular, companies should prioritize data quality improvement for activities that have the following:
- Relatively low data quality (based on the data quality guidance in section 7.3)
- Relatively high emissions
Companies are required to provide a description of the data quality of reported scope 3 emissions data to ensure transparency and avoid misinterpretation of data (see chapter 11). Refer to section 7.3 for guidance on describing data quality; Appendix B for guidance on uncertainty; and section 9.3 for guidance on recalculating base year emissions when making significant improvements in data quality over time.
Continue reeading the next chapter of the Standard in Guidance 08 Allocating Emissions
Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects
Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects Collecting data in Scope 3 projects