Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

The why and how of assigning responsibility for supply chain emissions

As regulatory attention on scope 3 emissions mounts, the ‘double-counting’ concern cited by companies can be addressed by allocating shared responsibility across the supply chain. Measurement and data collection present more substantial challenges in reaching an effective allocation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Scope 3 emissions as a fraction of total supply chain emissions across industry sectors.
Fig. 2: Comparing an ad hoc, the value-added and the Shapley approaches to assigning scope 3 emission responsibilities in a bottled wine supply chain.

References

  1. Transparency to Transformation: A Chain Reaction: CDP Supply Chain Report 2020 (Carbon Disclosure Project, 2021); https://go.nature.com/3UcaXhA

  2. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (World Resources Institute & World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2004); https://go.nature.com/3ToiYj6

  3. Caro, F., Lane, L. & Saez de Tejada Cuenca, A. Manag. Sci. 67, 2010–2028 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gensler, G. Statement on Proposed Mandatory Climate Risk Disclosures (US Securities and Exchange Commission, 2022); https://go.nature.com/3gVNkLM

  5. Lighter Glass Bottles can Reduce CO2 Emissions by up to 16% Based on New Lifecycle Analysis for O.P. Anderson Aquavit (Anora, 2020); https://go.nature.com/3zxM6N3

  6. Caro, F., Corbett, C. J., Tan, T. & Zuidwijk, R. Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag. 15, 545–558 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Coase, R. H. J. Law Econ. 3, 1–4 (1960).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hoffman, E. & Spitzer, M. L. J. Law Econ. 25, 73–98 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lenzen, M., Murray, J., Sack, F. & Wiedmann, T. Ecol. Econ. 61, 27–42 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gallego, B. & Lenzen, M. Econ. Syst. Res. 17, 365–391 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gopalakrishnan, S., Granot, D., Granot, F., Sošić, G. & Cui, H. Manag. Sci. 67, 4172–4190 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Domingos, T., Zafrilla, J. E. & López, L. A. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 729–730 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sanjith Gopalakrishnan.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gopalakrishnan, S. The why and how of assigning responsibility for supply chain emissions. Nat. Clim. Chang. 12, 1075–1077 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01543-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01543-x

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing