Comment on page
Differences of net impact results and company disclosures
This page describes how net impact data differs from GHG inventories or other bottom-up company disclosures.
Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions as defined by the Greenhouse Gas Protocol include double counting of emissions of related companies:
By definition, scope 3 emissions occur from sources owned or controlled by other entities in the value chain (e.g., materials suppliers, third-party logistics providers, waste management suppliers, travel suppliers, lessees and lessors, franchisees, retailers, employees, and customers). Scope 3 emissions for the reporting company are by definition the direct emissions of another entity. [...] Because of this type of double counting, scope 3 emissions should not be aggregated across companies to determine total emissions in a given region. [...] companies should acknowledge any potential double counting of reductions or credits when making claims about scope 3 reductions[...] double counting is a problem when it comes to offset credits or other market instruments that convey unique claims to GHG reductions or removals. If GHG reductions or removals take on a monetary value or receive credit in a GHG reduction program, it is necessary to avoid double counting of credits from such reductions or removals.
The Upright net impact model attributes total emissions across the whole private sector, meaning that impact is not double counted. This makes emission values in the net impact model incomparable with companies' bottom-up GHG inventories. (Read more in Essential principles.)
Tax payments and employment numbers reported by companies relate to direct impacts. They do not consider indirect impacts enabled by the company. On the other hand, such direct disclosures do not account for indirect influence that other companies in the value chain might have on the direct impacts of the company.
When considering a the tax payments or job creation of a company, the Upright net impact model credits the company for some indirect impact it has in its value chain, but it also credits companies in the value chain for direct impacts of the company. This avoids double counting impacts across the private sector, but consequently the figures are not expected to match companies' disclosures of direct impact. (Read more in Essential principles.)