2024
Groupe SEB
Year
Sector
Industrie légère
ACT assessment methodology
Generic
Performance Score
Groupe SEB has ambitious climate targets, validated by SBTi and aligned with a trajectory compatible with a warming limit of 1.5°C. In particular, it aims to reduce its scope 1 and 2 emissions by 42% by 2030, a target that has already been partially achieved, as well as a 25% reduction in indirect upstream (cat.1 and 4) and downstream (cat.11) emissions, i.e. most of scope 3. In the long term, SEB aims to reduce its emissions by 90% by 2050. In terms of eco-design, the group has a solid performance, with 91% of products repairable in 2023, exceeding its target set for 2030, and a recyclability rate of 80%, with a notable increase in the use of recycled materials.
In addition, climate governance is well structured, supported by a general management committee and a dedicated CSR committee, which integrate extra-financial criteria into executive compensation. SEB's transition plan is based on concrete actions around repairability, recyclability and the increased use of recycled materials. The transition plan for emissions related to the use of products is still under construction, but SEB is targeting the most emitting product families to improve their energy efficiency and encourage more sober uses through nudging. The group is also developing circular business models, such as RépareSeb, which has reconditioned more than 23,000 products in 2024 and supports professional integration. Finally, SEB is known for its local social commitment, in particular with the collaboration with Arès for a repair workshop promoting professional reintegration in a low-carbon approach.
However, there are some areas that need improvement. The supplier engagement strategy remains weak, with no formal requirements for emissions reductions or clear monitoring mechanisms. Similarly, customer engagement is still in the development phase, with a lack of precise indicators to measure the deployment of the levers put in place, as well as a lack of a dedicated strategy to involve distributors and share LCA data with them.
Transparency on lobbying practices is also insufficient. Despite the group's statement that it does not influence climate policies, SEB employs several lobbyists and does not publish the full list of its associative affiliations, which raises contradictions, particularly with regard to the positions of the AFEP, of which it is a member, which advocates globally for the easing of European environmental policies. Finally, even if SEB is moving forward with the decarbonization of its business model, the development of new circular business models, such as the rental of small appliances launched in 2018, it lacks clear objectives and recent data, which limits visibility on their future contribution.
In addition, climate governance is well structured, supported by a general management committee and a dedicated CSR committee, which integrate extra-financial criteria into executive compensation. SEB's transition plan is based on concrete actions around repairability, recyclability and the increased use of recycled materials. The transition plan for emissions related to the use of products is still under construction, but SEB is targeting the most emitting product families to improve their energy efficiency and encourage more sober uses through nudging. The group is also developing circular business models, such as RépareSeb, which has reconditioned more than 23,000 products in 2024 and supports professional integration. Finally, SEB is known for its local social commitment, in particular with the collaboration with Arès for a repair workshop promoting professional reintegration in a low-carbon approach.
However, there are some areas that need improvement. The supplier engagement strategy remains weak, with no formal requirements for emissions reductions or clear monitoring mechanisms. Similarly, customer engagement is still in the development phase, with a lack of precise indicators to measure the deployment of the levers put in place, as well as a lack of a dedicated strategy to involve distributors and share LCA data with them.
Transparency on lobbying practices is also insufficient. Despite the group's statement that it does not influence climate policies, SEB employs several lobbyists and does not publish the full list of its associative affiliations, which raises contradictions, particularly with regard to the positions of the AFEP, of which it is a member, which advocates globally for the easing of European environmental policies. Finally, even if SEB is moving forward with the decarbonization of its business model, the development of new circular business models, such as the rental of small appliances launched in 2018, it lacks clear objectives and recent data, which limits visibility on their future contribution.
Narrative Score
Business model and strategy: Groupe SEB has a strategy oriented towards a more sustainable business model, in particular through eco-design, repairability and the use of recycled materials. These axes are well integrated into products and industrial design, which positions SEB as a player ahead of the curve on these subjects. However, the transformation of the business model is still not yet complete: second-hand activities represent less than 1% of turnover in 2023, and other identified levers, such as rental, lack concrete data and structuring objectives. SEB is somewhat dependent on high-carbon activities such as metal production, but has been successfully transitioning to recycled materials for several years.
Consistency and credibility: The credibility of SEB's climate approach is generally strong, thanks to measurable results on reducing emissions and integrating recycled materials. Still, some strategic inconsistencies remain. While the products are designed to be recyclable, the group's strategy does not detail how it ensures effective recycling. The "distribution" dimension is also underdeveloped: sales channels and collaboration with distributors do not seem to be integrated into the climate strategy. In addition, the lack of analysis on electronic components and the potential impacts of connected products creates a grey area on the long-term evolution of the environmental footprint.
Data quality: The quality of the published data is satisfactory. SEB is transparent about emissions monitoring, including complex emission items such as Scope 11 (product use), for which it clearly explains its assumptions and methodological limitations.
Reputation: SEB's position is weakened by a lack of transparency on its lobbying activities. The group claims not to influence climate policy, which is contradicted by external data (LobbyMap) indicating the existence of at least 4.5 lobbyist FTEs. Controversial practices, particularly around the defence of the use of PFAS despite proven pollution and scientific warnings, are fuelling doubts about its alignment with environmental and health issues. This opacity harms the company's overall credibility on climate issues.
Risks: SEB remains exposed to significant material risks. Its business is still heavily based on carbon-based raw materials such as aluminium and steel. The group has put in place a transition plan to reduce this dependence, but the scale of the risk remains high amid a potential rise in the price of carbon. In addition, the upcoming bans on PFAS pose a strong regulatory and reputational threat, especially since SEB has shown little anticipation on this subject so far.
All of these elements lead to Groupe SEB having a narrative score of B.
Consistency and credibility: The credibility of SEB's climate approach is generally strong, thanks to measurable results on reducing emissions and integrating recycled materials. Still, some strategic inconsistencies remain. While the products are designed to be recyclable, the group's strategy does not detail how it ensures effective recycling. The "distribution" dimension is also underdeveloped: sales channels and collaboration with distributors do not seem to be integrated into the climate strategy. In addition, the lack of analysis on electronic components and the potential impacts of connected products creates a grey area on the long-term evolution of the environmental footprint.
Data quality: The quality of the published data is satisfactory. SEB is transparent about emissions monitoring, including complex emission items such as Scope 11 (product use), for which it clearly explains its assumptions and methodological limitations.
Reputation: SEB's position is weakened by a lack of transparency on its lobbying activities. The group claims not to influence climate policy, which is contradicted by external data (LobbyMap) indicating the existence of at least 4.5 lobbyist FTEs. Controversial practices, particularly around the defence of the use of PFAS despite proven pollution and scientific warnings, are fuelling doubts about its alignment with environmental and health issues. This opacity harms the company's overall credibility on climate issues.
Risks: SEB remains exposed to significant material risks. Its business is still heavily based on carbon-based raw materials such as aluminium and steel. The group has put in place a transition plan to reduce this dependence, but the scale of the risk remains high amid a potential rise in the price of carbon. In addition, the upcoming bans on PFAS pose a strong regulatory and reputational threat, especially since SEB has shown little anticipation on this subject so far.
All of these elements lead to Groupe SEB having a narrative score of B.
Trend score
Essential elements of SEB's low-carbon strategy are clearly gaining momentum, in particular the strategy to reduce emissions linked to the use of products. The structuring of this strategy should make it possible to continue the reduction of emissions, mainly achieved through interventions on the upstream of products so far. The trend rating of the transition plan is "+".
Source
ACT Eval 2
Evaluator
CITEPA
GLOBAL SCORE
Performance score (/100)
52
Disclosure score (/100)
97
ℹ️
Narrative Score (A > E)
B
Trend Score (- = +)
+
Scores by module
#1 : best score in the sample
N/A% = module not applicable to the sectoral methodology
Target Score : 79%
Material Investment Score : 13%
Intangible Investment Score : 0%
Sold Product Performance Score : 72%
Management Score : 62%
Supplier Engagement Score : 21%
Client Engagement Score : 43%
Policy Engagement Score : 39%
Business Model Score : 27%
Indicator weight by module