2024
Orange
Year
Sector
Télécommunications
ACT assessment methodology
Generic
Performance Score
Scope 1, 2 and 3 emission reduction targets for 2025, 2030 and 2040 that are aligned with the Paris Agreement, although defined in a market-based approach. Upward trend in Scope 1 and 2 emissions and downstream Scope 3 emissions, but a downward trend in upstream Scope 3, in a location-based approach. Investment spending and R&D efforts insufficiently directed towards decarbonisation. Very significant decarbonization levers have been mobilized: improving the energy efficiency of the digital infrastructure, self-consumption of photovoltaic electricity, and circular economy and eco-design approaches for customer equipment.
Supervision of the challenges of the low-carbon transition at the level of the board of directors and criterion based on scope 1 and 2 emissions in the annual remuneration of the CEO, but lack of expertise of the committee on the subject. A transition plan detailing the actions carried out but very succinct and opaque from a prospective point of view. Risk analysis and opportunities superficial and not based on the use of transition scenarios.
Significant supplier engagement with priority suppliers as well as VSEs/SMEs, with audits and corrective action plans. There is no formalized strategy for engaging customers or a public review of the alignment of the company's own postures and activities with those of the professional associations of which the company is a member.
Low share of revenue aligned with the low-carbon transition involving a portfolio of sustainable solutions as well as environmental consulting and auditing activities. Operation of digital infrastructures dependent on high-emitting grid electricity or generators that can be deeply decarbonized via the self-consumption of photovoltaic electricity, which is planned and deployed in the Africa and Middle East area.
Supervision of the challenges of the low-carbon transition at the level of the board of directors and criterion based on scope 1 and 2 emissions in the annual remuneration of the CEO, but lack of expertise of the committee on the subject. A transition plan detailing the actions carried out but very succinct and opaque from a prospective point of view. Risk analysis and opportunities superficial and not based on the use of transition scenarios.
Significant supplier engagement with priority suppliers as well as VSEs/SMEs, with audits and corrective action plans. There is no formalized strategy for engaging customers or a public review of the alignment of the company's own postures and activities with those of the professional associations of which the company is a member.
Low share of revenue aligned with the low-carbon transition involving a portfolio of sustainable solutions as well as environmental consulting and auditing activities. Operation of digital infrastructures dependent on high-emitting grid electricity or generators that can be deeply decarbonized via the self-consumption of photovoltaic electricity, which is planned and deployed in the Africa and Middle East area.
Narrative Score
Business model and strategy: Mixed business model alignment. Consideration of the negative and positive effects of digital in the strategy, relevant decarbonisation actions and R&D efforts on responsible digitalisation, but significant scope to align activities with the EU green taxonomy and stagnation of the turnover of the sustainable solutions portfolio.
Coherence and credibility: Some major issues, such as the lack of questioning on the sobriety of digital uses and the rebound effects, and the intention to massively use generative AI in its offer of solutions.
Data quality: Also some major issues, such as the publication of emissions broken down by scope and item only for 2023-2024 and not for the reference years (except for the reference values of the reduction targets), the use of materiality thresholds or conditions for scope 1 and 2 emission sources, and the obvious non-use of residual mix emission factors for the provision not associated with market instruments.
Reputation: A controversy has been raised about the partnership with Alliance Forêts Bois, which is said to practice clear-cutting and poorly diversified plantations in its projects certified with the Low Carbon Label. Maintaining the partnership with a mixed response.
Risks: Operation of data centers and other digital infrastructure powered by high-emitting grid electricity in many countries, but gradual implementation of photovoltaic electricity self-consumption projects. Two major issues that have not been sufficiently taken into account: the strong dependence of the scope 1 and 2 decarbonisation strategy on the market-based approach and the supply of electricity associated with market instruments; and failure to assess the impact on emissions of the massive use of artificial intelligence and the rebound effects of digital technology.
Coherence and credibility: Some major issues, such as the lack of questioning on the sobriety of digital uses and the rebound effects, and the intention to massively use generative AI in its offer of solutions.
Data quality: Also some major issues, such as the publication of emissions broken down by scope and item only for 2023-2024 and not for the reference years (except for the reference values of the reduction targets), the use of materiality thresholds or conditions for scope 1 and 2 emission sources, and the obvious non-use of residual mix emission factors for the provision not associated with market instruments.
Reputation: A controversy has been raised about the partnership with Alliance Forêts Bois, which is said to practice clear-cutting and poorly diversified plantations in its projects certified with the Low Carbon Label. Maintaining the partnership with a mixed response.
Risks: Operation of data centers and other digital infrastructure powered by high-emitting grid electricity in many countries, but gradual implementation of photovoltaic electricity self-consumption projects. Two major issues that have not been sufficiently taken into account: the strong dependence of the scope 1 and 2 decarbonisation strategy on the market-based approach and the supply of electricity associated with market instruments; and failure to assess the impact on emissions of the massive use of artificial intelligence and the rebound effects of digital technology.
Trend score
There may be an upward trend in emissions in a location-based approach, due to the widespread use of generative AI and the rebound effects of digital technology that are likely to offset the reductions achieved, thanks in particular to energy efficiency. A favourable external factor: gradual decarbonisation of national electricity mixes. Unfavorable external factor: increase in demand for data.
There are few signs of a change in strategic direction towards better alignment with the low-carbon transition. The CEO's long-term remuneration policy has become a priori less incentive for decarbonisation.
An action plan that is credible and significant enough to have led to tangible reductions in emissions, in light of the achievements of recent years.
There are few signs of a change in strategic direction towards better alignment with the low-carbon transition. The CEO's long-term remuneration policy has become a priori less incentive for decarbonisation.
An action plan that is credible and significant enough to have led to tangible reductions in emissions, in light of the achievements of recent years.
Source
ACT Eval 2
Evaluator
CITEPA
GLOBAL SCORE
Performance score (/100)
47
Disclosure score (/100)
90
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 : 88%
Material Investment Score : 0%
Intangible Investment Score : 0%
Sold Product Performance Score : 73%
Management Score : 44%
Supplier Engagement Score : 61%
Client Engagement Score : 24%
Policy Engagement Score : 32%
Business Model Score : 33%
Indicator weight by module