Net-Zero is often the main, or only, focus of an organisation’s stated work on ESG. Hopefully, these action roots demonstrate how much broader ESG is. It is vital to ensure that reducing emissions is a top priority of an organisation. Still, it isn’t the only one in ESG terms. A full impact assessment requires understanding regulatory change. These impacts will affect how organisations in our supply chain operations in the future.
Environmental impacts are not limited to climate change. Significant impacts also occur in the nearer term. This includes those attached to biodiversity and ecology. There are clear reasons for this. There may be a choice to reduce carbon emissions, but the substituted process may have other negative environmental (or social) consequences; or vice-versa.
There is substantial toxicity in the production of goods, and IT is no exception. By the nature of the metals and other elements they rely upon, electronics have wide-ranging environmental impacts.
In addition, depending on how these base elements and chemicals are sourced, the effect can vary greatly. There are potentially significant social implications in the lifecycle of IT products from their manufacturing, distribution, use, and disposal. These implications may impact well-being and culture at every one of these stages. Therefore, to be responsible, those within the supply chain should alter their expectations and influence how others perform. This is part of the SDGs.
There are specific centres of excellence for this type of work. In the UK, the Hadley Centre, the USA, has NCAR ). In Japan, there is JMA ), and, in Australia, there is CSIRO
All of these centres of excellence take a global outlook. However, specific scenarios are subject to ‘statistical downscaling’, which looks at how these ‘climate scenarios’ may impact more locally. Due to the computer processing requirements, these centres are substantial energy users. The outputs of these centres are included in IPCC reports. However, the timeline that IPCC reports work against means that the science relied upon is not as current as the studies they regularly release.
1 (National Centre for Atmospheric Research
2 (Japan Meteorological Agency
3 (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation).
The ‘transition’ component of the Taskforce work involves understanding the direction of legislation and what impact this may have. As energy requirements are the primary cause of global warming, how energy policy in the UK (and globally) may change in future must be part of business planning. This is due to the requirement for energy from zero-carbon sources to meet international climate goals.
To maximise organisational resilience, businesses need to establish what type of investment should happen and the periods over which it should be spread. The requirements to reduce the carbon intensity of products and services vary between countries. Therefore, recognising what countries are within a supply chain and how this may impact things is needed – as this can affect the services and products being delivered. The TCFD, therefore, fundamentally includes an organisation’s pathway to achieving net zero.
The requirement of the TNFD (Taskforce for Nature related non-Financial Disclosures) requires organisations to understand the wider and, perhaps, more immediate impacts of biodiversity and ecology. Such effects are significant in the IT industry, as there is substantial manufacturing, extraction of various raw materials (e.g. metals, elements, oil), and the need to create multiple chemicals for use in electronics.
These effects include the most intensive greenhouse gases (SF6, NF3 and certain HFCs & PFCs) and the impacts during the destruction of the products. These can have climate and/or nature implications – a critical issue would be to ensure that reducing climate impact does not negatively impact nature in the immediacy.
This Root is 10th to signify that it is a function of the rest. In many ways, it is an output. There will likely be other taskforces, including a social one (the x in TxFD is to signify this expansion). This is because the way decisions are taken, including what is considered, dictates Daisy’s impact.
That means implementing our corporate governance, our values, tracking progress, engagement with our stakeholders and the success of the LIAISETM programme will drive Daisy’s short- and long-term impact. Identifying greenwash early is critical to not locking into the wrong path. Climate Mitigation is a complicated area, with high stakes, due to its many, sometimes conflicting facets. Daisy’s impacts here will only be reduced if we work with others whose claims can be verified.
These partnerships necessitate building trust in the short-, medium- and long term. Once greenwash occurs, or false claims are made, it can deeply damage reputation – with some losing more than others.