Suppliers to the government have a major role to play in cutting the UK's carbon footprint, but many have not got their act together, according to a report from the non-profit Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP).
The CDP report says there is a need for better integration of carbon reduction strategies within suppliers’ organisational policies. The report, "CDP 2009 Public Procurement Report for the UK Government", was written by leading climate change consultancy AEA.
The report is the result of a collaboration by 14 departments and executive agencies, including the Cabinet Office, Department of Business Innovation and Skills, Ministry of Defence, and the Office of Government Commerce, to encourage their suppliers to disclose their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate change related risk.
Government business secretary Lord Mandelson said, “Involvement in the CDP Public Procurement Programme provides government and its suppliers with the opportunity to work together to bring about real reductions in carbon emissions through joint working and sharing of best practice."
Just over 80% of the 164 supplier companies taking part in the report were able to disclose their emissions, with around 77% disclosing their scope 1 and 2 emissions - direct GHG emissions, from onsite energy usage, production and other industrial activities.
However, the report identified the need to understand all aspects of Scope 3 emissions (indirect emissions), such as supply chain and product emissions, for organisations to fully understand and appraise their potential weaknesses.
In addition, whilst two-thirds (66%) of organisations have put in place carbon reduction targets demonstrating an intent to reduce emissions, the majority of these are short-term and not in line with the longer-term targets that the UK government has set itself.
In the past year, government departments have communicated with suppliers that climate change is a business issue, and that accountability at the highest level is vital, says the report. In response, 68% of suppliers said their boards or executive committees had overall responsibility for carbon reductions, but only 32% of those questioned were able to say how responsibility for carbon reductions had been assigned.



