2024
Forvia SE
Year
Sector
Automobile
ACT assessment methodology
Generic
Performance Score
Forvia has ambitious decarbonisation targets for all its emissions. Important actions are being implemented or planned for scopes 1 and 2. However, at the scope 3 level (99% of the company's emissions), while decarbonization actions are implemented at all stages of the value chain, the share of emissions they cover and the extent of the expected reductions are not defined. In addition, long-term actions are not quantified beyond 2030.
Although Forvia has a supplier strategy covering the vast majority of its purchasing volume (2000 suppliers), it could become more relevant if Forvia required them to seriously consider the climate issue through the assessment of their emissions and the implementation of reduction targets aligned with science. In addition, Forvia does not have a structured client strategy that would allow it to justify the consistency of its commitments.
Finally, Forvia does not question its business model, which is still very dependent on internal combustion vehicles. While the company is starting to position itself in the areas of electrification and vehicle life extension, it does not seem to be inclined to see these activities as priorities.
Although Forvia has a supplier strategy covering the vast majority of its purchasing volume (2000 suppliers), it could become more relevant if Forvia required them to seriously consider the climate issue through the assessment of their emissions and the implementation of reduction targets aligned with science. In addition, Forvia does not have a structured client strategy that would allow it to justify the consistency of its commitments.
Finally, Forvia does not question its business model, which is still very dependent on internal combustion vehicles. While the company is starting to position itself in the areas of electrification and vehicle life extension, it does not seem to be inclined to see these activities as priorities.
Narrative Score
Business model and strategy: Forvia has set emission reduction targets for its entire business, in the short, medium and long term. Despite this, its business model is still very much focused on internal combustion vehicles, which calls into question its ability to achieve its objectives.
Coherence and credibility: The very ambitious objective of reducing scope 3 emissions by 90% by 2045 compared to 2019 is not supported by a precise, qualified and quantified transition plan. Actions are listed and groups of actions are quantified for 2030, but not for 2050. Thus, the achievement of the ambitious objectives announced is uncertain.
Data quality: GHG emissions cover all of the company's activities and have been calculated for several years, and recalculated over certain years for reasons of scope consistency. However, only a market-based scope 2 is reported (85% of scope 1+2 emissions in the reference year). The levers to achieve the objective of -80% emissions by 2025 on scopes 1 &2 are largely based on PPAs. The company's objectives would thus become more relevant if they were based on a scope 2 location-based.
Reputation: No incidents noted.
Risks: The breakdown of sales by vehicle type is not explicit, making it difficult to say whether the company is redirecting sales to a non-fossil fuel market. Nevertheless, the company has set up a business unit aligned with the ecological transition ("clean mobility"), and another partially ("lifecycle solutions", on extending the life of vehicles). However, these activities represent less than 20% of sales in 2024, and it is not clear whether the company aims to make them the most important business units in terms of revenue.
Coherence and credibility: The very ambitious objective of reducing scope 3 emissions by 90% by 2045 compared to 2019 is not supported by a precise, qualified and quantified transition plan. Actions are listed and groups of actions are quantified for 2030, but not for 2050. Thus, the achievement of the ambitious objectives announced is uncertain.
Data quality: GHG emissions cover all of the company's activities and have been calculated for several years, and recalculated over certain years for reasons of scope consistency. However, only a market-based scope 2 is reported (85% of scope 1+2 emissions in the reference year). The levers to achieve the objective of -80% emissions by 2025 on scopes 1 &2 are largely based on PPAs. The company's objectives would thus become more relevant if they were based on a scope 2 location-based.
Reputation: No incidents noted.
Risks: The breakdown of sales by vehicle type is not explicit, making it difficult to say whether the company is redirecting sales to a non-fossil fuel market. Nevertheless, the company has set up a business unit aligned with the ecological transition ("clean mobility"), and another partially ("lifecycle solutions", on extending the life of vehicles). However, these activities represent less than 20% of sales in 2024, and it is not clear whether the company aims to make them the most important business units in terms of revenue.
Trend score
The company has many assets to achieve its transition: robust emissions monitoring, equity monitoring and existing governance, actions at each stage of its value chain. However, the share of low-carbon products that can be sold is still uncertain and depends on the products demanded by customers.
By being a source of proposals to its customers on its low-carbon products, the company can encourage the evolution of the automotive manufacturing industry towards the low-carbon transition. If the company wants to achieve the ambitious goals it has set for itself, it will be forced to do so.
By being a source of proposals to its customers on its low-carbon products, the company can encourage the evolution of the automotive manufacturing industry towards the low-carbon transition. If the company wants to achieve the ambitious goals it has set for itself, it will be forced to do so.
Source
ACT Eval 2
Evaluator
CITEPA
GLOBAL SCORE
Performance score (/100)
38
Disclosure score (/100)
89
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 : 93%
Material Investment Score : 25%
Intangible Investment Score : 0%
Sold Product Performance Score : 37%
Management Score : 52%
Supplier Engagement Score : 46%
Client Engagement Score : 11%
Policy Engagement Score : 40%
Business Model Score : 8%
Indicator weight by module