2024
Sanofi
Year
Sector
Pharmacie
ACT assessment methodology
Generic
Performance Score
Strengths of the transition plan: The scope 3 targets concern all indirect emission items, and the long-term objectives are aligned with the SBTi decarbonisation requirements (-90% of emissions in 2045 scopes 1/2/3). There has also been a decrease in emissions on scopes 1 and 2, as well as a decrease in scope 3 emissions on the procurement of goods/services (-11% between 2019 and 2024), in particular through the decrease in the purchase volumes of certain carbon-intensive raw materials (Sanofi has considerably reduced its purchases in China to the profile of suppliers in Spain and France). The Group also claims that it is gradually replacing air freight in favor of more sustainable modes of transport and optimization of transport (current 11% reduction in GHG emissions from upstream transport between 2019 and 2024). In addition, Sanofi has a good level of maturity in terms of the governance model for climate issues, with the highest level of the company's hierarchy being involved in the supervision of climate issues. In 2024, the supplier engagement program brought together 205 suppliers representing 75% of GHG emissions from procurement, in which top suppliers were required to commit to calculating their scope 1+2+3 emissions and publishing them. On the customer side, the company aims to achieve LCAs on every new product from 2025, and on the 20 best-selling products by 2030. Currently 27 LCAs have been carried out. Finally, Sanofi measures the effectiveness of its eco-design actions (the reduction in emissions of two major drugs is around 15% between two versions).
Areas for improvement identified: On the setting of targets, Sanofi could improve transparency on the distribution of the 2045 Net Zero emissions targets (between scopes 1 &2 on the one hand, and scope 3 on the other). The scope 1&2 objective relates to market-based issuance and is essentially based on the purchase of Guarantees of Origin, an instrument whose effectiveness is controversial. The transition plan is not fully detailed, there is no precise information on the annual implementation of the actions over the next 5 years. At the same time, there was an increase in downstream scope 3 emissions between 2019 and 2024 (+19%) without any real actions being identified to reduce them (in particular the treatment and use of products sold). In addition, the sustainability report indicates an investment of between 300 and 400 million euros per year on average on these decarbonization issues, but no information is published on the distribution of investments (equipment vs. purchases of GO/PPA contracts vs. carbon credits, etc.). Despite a commitment to the value chain, there is no information to conclude that the failure to take into account the commitments of top suppliers is binding (de-referencing for example). Finally, Sanofi could identify the list of drugs for which a stroke has been performed, in order to make more transparent the share of sales associated with these drugs in the company's total sales.
Areas for improvement identified: On the setting of targets, Sanofi could improve transparency on the distribution of the 2045 Net Zero emissions targets (between scopes 1 &2 on the one hand, and scope 3 on the other). The scope 1&2 objective relates to market-based issuance and is essentially based on the purchase of Guarantees of Origin, an instrument whose effectiveness is controversial. The transition plan is not fully detailed, there is no precise information on the annual implementation of the actions over the next 5 years. At the same time, there was an increase in downstream scope 3 emissions between 2019 and 2024 (+19%) without any real actions being identified to reduce them (in particular the treatment and use of products sold). In addition, the sustainability report indicates an investment of between 300 and 400 million euros per year on average on these decarbonization issues, but no information is published on the distribution of investments (equipment vs. purchases of GO/PPA contracts vs. carbon credits, etc.). Despite a commitment to the value chain, there is no information to conclude that the failure to take into account the commitments of top suppliers is binding (de-referencing for example). Finally, Sanofi could identify the list of drugs for which a stroke has been performed, in order to make more transparent the share of sales associated with these drugs in the company's total sales.
Narrative Score
Sanofi is aware of the need to work on products. The company's main strategic decarbonisation priorities have been identified and actions have been initiated or are in the process of being undertaken to achieve the objectives set. However, the company seems to be prioritizing its scope 2 decarbonization efforts in the purchase of certificates of origin and is setting decarbonization targets according to the market-based approach, which undermines the relevance of its climate strategy.
A good overall quality of the data was identified, both on the operational scope of taking into account the reduction targets (scope 3 in its entirety) and on the organizational scope (all BUs integrated into the objectives). It was also stressed that there was good overall coherence and transparency on the timing of the estimated emissions between the reporting year and the reference year (sites/disposals, etc.). However, it seems that Sanofi does not include in its scope 1 the emissions of biogas consumption purchased via biomethane supply certificates, which is contrary to the GHG Protocol calculation methods. This results in an underestimation of quantified emissions for this scope 1.
A good overall quality of the data was identified, both on the operational scope of taking into account the reduction targets (scope 3 in its entirety) and on the organizational scope (all BUs integrated into the objectives). It was also stressed that there was good overall coherence and transparency on the timing of the estimated emissions between the reporting year and the reference year (sites/disposals, etc.). However, it seems that Sanofi does not include in its scope 1 the emissions of biogas consumption purchased via biomethane supply certificates, which is contrary to the GHG Protocol calculation methods. This results in an underestimation of quantified emissions for this scope 1.
Trend score
Although the lack of detailed information on asset and equity planning increases uncertainty about the expected trend over the next three to four years, the positive factors (strong supplier involvement, eco-design strategy, internal carbon pricing) seem to be working in favour of an improvement in the performance score.
Source
ACT Eval 2
Evaluator
CITEPA
GLOBAL SCORE
Performance score (/100)
60
Disclosure score (/100)
100
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 : 84%
Material Investment Score : 35%
Intangible Investment Score : N/A%
Sold Product Performance Score : 51%
Management Score : 80%
Supplier Engagement Score : 75%
Client Engagement Score : 55%
Policy Engagement Score : 60%
Business Model Score : 45%
Indicator weight by module