2024
Imerys
Year
Sector
Industrie lourde
ACT assessment methodology
Generic
Performance Score
Imerys does not currently have a clear and operational strategy to reduce its indirect emissions, both upstream and downstream in its value chain. The historically low reduction in scope 3 reflects the company's limited ability to curb this area of emissions. While Imerys is presenting a structured action plan for 2030, no roadmap has yet been defined beyond that. In addition, the lack of intermediate targets limits the monitoring of progress and the ability to adjust the strategy over time.
Imerys fails to transparently demonstrate the carbon footprint of its products or quantify the climate gains from its innovations. This weakness limits the value of its efforts in terms of eco-design and sustainability. Finally, the company devotes only a limited part of its resources to R&D oriented towards climate issues. In addition, the proportion of its business portfolio aligned with the energy transition sectors remains low.
Imerys produces quality and clear documents, which has made it possible to carry out a good assessment of the group's current situation. On the other hand, some information is missing and has severely penalized the company's rating, such as information on its future actions (investment, R&D, business model) as well as quantitative data on the performance of its products.
Imerys fails to transparently demonstrate the carbon footprint of its products or quantify the climate gains from its innovations. This weakness limits the value of its efforts in terms of eco-design and sustainability. Finally, the company devotes only a limited part of its resources to R&D oriented towards climate issues. In addition, the proportion of its business portfolio aligned with the energy transition sectors remains low.
Imerys produces quality and clear documents, which has made it possible to carry out a good assessment of the group's current situation. On the other hand, some information is missing and has severely penalized the company's rating, such as information on its future actions (investment, R&D, business model) as well as quantitative data on the performance of its products.
Narrative Score
Business model and strategy: Imerys is involved upstream in many value chains with a wide variety of profiles (construction, health, automotive, industry, energy, etc.), whose challenges and contributions to the low-carbon transition are heterogeneous. In the energy and automotive sectors, for example, Imerys supplies key materials for electrification and improving the performance of final products. However, the company does not currently have a clear enough strategic plan to assess the extent of the efforts undertaken and to plan to strengthen them in favor of these transitions.
Consistency and credibility: Imerys' commitments on its direct emissions are both ambitious and credible, thanks in large part to the support of the SBTi framework that has made it possible to formalize them. Although the actions envisaged to achieve them are presented in an essentially qualitative manner, the governance of the transition appears sufficiently structured to assess the overall plan as coherent and realistic. On the other hand, as regards indirect emissions, there are no concrete measures targeting suppliers or customers at this stage to give confidence in the company's ability to achieve its objectives.
Data quality: Public information on Imerys' objectives and past issuances is of good quality. On the other hand, Imerys does not communicate enough about its strategy for the coming years or about the details of the products sold produced and their weight in the decarbonization strategy.
Reputation: Imerys is cited in various environmental controversies, which undermines the credibility of its transition plan. The company does not seem to have a procedure for verifying the alignment between its objectives and those of the professional associations in which it is a member.
Risks: Imerys has correctly mapped the risks related to its activity thanks to the support of independent external experts.
Consistency and credibility: Imerys' commitments on its direct emissions are both ambitious and credible, thanks in large part to the support of the SBTi framework that has made it possible to formalize them. Although the actions envisaged to achieve them are presented in an essentially qualitative manner, the governance of the transition appears sufficiently structured to assess the overall plan as coherent and realistic. On the other hand, as regards indirect emissions, there are no concrete measures targeting suppliers or customers at this stage to give confidence in the company's ability to achieve its objectives.
Data quality: Public information on Imerys' objectives and past issuances is of good quality. On the other hand, Imerys does not communicate enough about its strategy for the coming years or about the details of the products sold produced and their weight in the decarbonization strategy.
Reputation: Imerys is cited in various environmental controversies, which undermines the credibility of its transition plan. The company does not seem to have a procedure for verifying the alignment between its objectives and those of the professional associations in which it is a member.
Risks: Imerys has correctly mapped the risks related to its activity thanks to the support of independent external experts.
Trend score
The commitments made by Imerys are relatively ambitious, particularly with regard to scope 1 and 2 emissions. These targets, made public and validated by the SBTi initiative, will undoubtedly require the company to implement concrete actions to achieve them. Some of these actions have already been implemented and described by Imerys.
The governance of Imerys' transition plan is well structured, which suggests an effective implementation of the actions necessary to achieve the climate objectives. On a strategic level, the company aims to strengthen its competitiveness in terms of ecological transition, in particular by developing its activities in growth sectors such as renewable energies and electric batteries for the automotive industry.
However, uncertainties remain about Imerys' ability to achieve its objectives. The comparison between the evolution of direct GHG emissions in market-based and location-based suggests that Imerys' efforts are mainly focused on the decarbonization of its energy supply, rather than on energy efficiency improvements. Emissions calculated in monetary intensity increased in 2024 compared to 2023, which could mean that the decrease in emissions in absolute terms is partly the result of cyclical effects, rather than an efficiency gain. In addition, Imerys has not adopted a clear strategy for reducing its indirect emissions.
The governance of Imerys' transition plan is well structured, which suggests an effective implementation of the actions necessary to achieve the climate objectives. On a strategic level, the company aims to strengthen its competitiveness in terms of ecological transition, in particular by developing its activities in growth sectors such as renewable energies and electric batteries for the automotive industry.
However, uncertainties remain about Imerys' ability to achieve its objectives. The comparison between the evolution of direct GHG emissions in market-based and location-based suggests that Imerys' efforts are mainly focused on the decarbonization of its energy supply, rather than on energy efficiency improvements. Emissions calculated in monetary intensity increased in 2024 compared to 2023, which could mean that the decrease in emissions in absolute terms is partly the result of cyclical effects, rather than an efficiency gain. In addition, Imerys has not adopted a clear strategy for reducing its indirect emissions.
Source
ACT Eval 2
Evaluator
CITEPA
GLOBAL SCORE
Performance score (/100)
32
Disclosure score (/100)
94
ℹ️
Narrative Score (A > E)
D
Trend Score (- = +)
=
Scores by module
#1 : best score in the sample
N/A% = module not applicable to the sectoral methodology
Target Score : 26%
Material Investment Score : 13%
Intangible Investment Score : 0%
Sold Product Performance Score : 56%
Management Score : 81%
Supplier Engagement Score : 24%
Client Engagement Score : 16%
Policy Engagement Score : 15%
Business Model Score : 11%
Indicator weight by module