2024
Fnac-Darty
Year
Sector
Distribution
ACT assessment methodology
Retail
Performance Score
Between 2019 and 2024, the Fnac Darty group's total emissions decreased by 10%, with the 50% reduction targets on scopes 1 and 2 already achieved. Emissions from buildings fell by 92%, and those from refrigerants by 69%. For transport, which accounts for 95% of the emissions in the category analysed, a 21% reduction was achieved on operated transport, representing about half of the total transport emissions. However, in the absence of mileage data and detailed information on refrigerant gases, these trajectories cannot be fully exploited.
Regarding scope 3, efforts are mainly focused on category 3.11, related to the use of products sold, with a 22% intensity reduction target validated by SBTi. However, this target has only increased by 1%, due to the strong dependence on the French electricity mix. No target has been set for Scope 1 (procurement of goods and services), which accounts for 58% of total emissions. The sustainability score, an internal indicator of the environmental performance of products, is now calculated for 61% of sales, but remains not very transparent and does not yet make a direct link with emissions. The decarbonization strategy is largely based on the circular economy, extending the life of products through repair, second-hand resale, and the promotion of sustainable products.
In terms of governance, a climate committee is in place, with the participation of members of the executive committee, but climate expertise remains limited. Circular governance is ensured by a dedicated committee, but the integration of upstream data remains weak, as shown by the mention of 0% specific data in the 2023 CDP. However, an LCA questionnaire was launched in 2024 among suppliers. The supplier commitment is based on the objective of obtaining SBTi targets for suppliers representing 80% of emissions by 2026. The group offers a code of conduct, collection questionnaires (SBTi, LCA, carbon footprint) and sharing of after-sales data. However, there is not yet a specifically "low-carbon" purchase offer.
Finally, the group does not publish a proactive position on public climate policies. However, the group is a member of the AFEP, which stands out for its advocacy in favour of the easing of climate regulations. The "everyday" strategic plan positions the group as the future leader in subscription-based home care services, with a strong investment in repair, represented by around 10% of the group's workforce. Despite this ambition and these notable operational advances, the lack of a consolidated decarbonisation trajectory and quantified planning beyond 2025 limits visibility on the real long-term impact.
Regarding scope 3, efforts are mainly focused on category 3.11, related to the use of products sold, with a 22% intensity reduction target validated by SBTi. However, this target has only increased by 1%, due to the strong dependence on the French electricity mix. No target has been set for Scope 1 (procurement of goods and services), which accounts for 58% of total emissions. The sustainability score, an internal indicator of the environmental performance of products, is now calculated for 61% of sales, but remains not very transparent and does not yet make a direct link with emissions. The decarbonization strategy is largely based on the circular economy, extending the life of products through repair, second-hand resale, and the promotion of sustainable products.
In terms of governance, a climate committee is in place, with the participation of members of the executive committee, but climate expertise remains limited. Circular governance is ensured by a dedicated committee, but the integration of upstream data remains weak, as shown by the mention of 0% specific data in the 2023 CDP. However, an LCA questionnaire was launched in 2024 among suppliers. The supplier commitment is based on the objective of obtaining SBTi targets for suppliers representing 80% of emissions by 2026. The group offers a code of conduct, collection questionnaires (SBTi, LCA, carbon footprint) and sharing of after-sales data. However, there is not yet a specifically "low-carbon" purchase offer.
Finally, the group does not publish a proactive position on public climate policies. However, the group is a member of the AFEP, which stands out for its advocacy in favour of the easing of climate regulations. The "everyday" strategic plan positions the group as the future leader in subscription-based home care services, with a strong investment in repair, represented by around 10% of the group's workforce. Despite this ambition and these notable operational advances, the lack of a consolidated decarbonisation trajectory and quantified planning beyond 2025 limits visibility on the real long-term impact.
Narrative Score
The Fnac-Darty group has begun its transition to a service economy, partly focused on the maintenance and repair of equipment sold and on the sale of second-life equipment. This orientation is structured by a coherent supplier and customer policy.
However, the credibility of the transition plan is limited: no target is defined on purchases (scope 3 category 1, 58% of emissions), and concrete actions to reduce emissions related to products purchased or used remain marginal. The progress observed on emissions is difficult to attribute to the group's actions, in the absence of an impact assessment and a clear methodology.
There are shortcomings in the reporting: little data on editorial products (17% of turnover), lack of estimation of LULUC emissions (paper), and calculation methods that are not very transparent. For example, 0% of scope 3.1 emissions are based on specific data, and the figures on transport do not correspond to the scope of the targets.
There have been no environmental scandals, but unaddressed risks persist. The impact of the electronic supply chain on the mining sector is underestimated, as are the physical risks (lack of analysis by climate scenario) and those related to the French electricity mix, which is very present in the group's carbon footprint. The latter is a vulnerability to the coming energy transition.
However, the credibility of the transition plan is limited: no target is defined on purchases (scope 3 category 1, 58% of emissions), and concrete actions to reduce emissions related to products purchased or used remain marginal. The progress observed on emissions is difficult to attribute to the group's actions, in the absence of an impact assessment and a clear methodology.
There are shortcomings in the reporting: little data on editorial products (17% of turnover), lack of estimation of LULUC emissions (paper), and calculation methods that are not very transparent. For example, 0% of scope 3.1 emissions are based on specific data, and the figures on transport do not correspond to the scope of the targets.
There have been no environmental scandals, but unaddressed risks persist. The impact of the electronic supply chain on the mining sector is underestimated, as are the physical risks (lack of analysis by climate scenario) and those related to the French electricity mix, which is very present in the group's carbon footprint. The latter is a vulnerability to the coming energy transition.
Trend score
There are many conflicting signals in the available data that make evaluation difficult. A decreasing emission trajectory (-10% since 2019) followed by an increase in emissions between 2023 and 2024 suggests a strong dependence on external factors. The transition of the business model is well underway but without a clear link to decarbonization. Lack of a target for most scope 3 emissions (cat 3.1), and no strategy directly addressing emissions in the product mix.
Source
ACT Eval 2
Evaluator
CITEPA
GLOBAL SCORE
Performance score (/100)
49
Disclosure score (/100)
99
ℹ️
Narrative Score (A > E)
C
Trend Score (- = +)
=
Scores by module
#1 : best score in the sample
N/A% = module not applicable to the sectoral methodology
Target Score : 43%
Material Investment Score : 55%
Intangible Investment Score : N/A%
Sold Product Performance Score : 45%
Management Score : 51%
Supplier Engagement Score : 40%
Client Engagement Score : 58%
Policy Engagement Score : 25%
Business Model Score : 63%
Indicator weight by module