Year

2023

Sector
Immobilier
ACT assessment methodology
Building construction

Performance Score

The group's "Construction" business unit (BU) alone was rated, which created a particular difficulty in accessing information at its boundaries.
Thus, 26% of the indicators could not be assessed due to the lack of information on the prospective elements and on the past trajectory of scope 3.
Decarbonization targets were set at the BU boundaries on scopes 1 and 2 (-40% in 2030 vs 2018), which do not, however, represent the majority of emissions.
A global scope 3 objective was set at the group boundaries (-20% in 2030 vs 2019).
These objectives are of a "WB2°C" ambition according to the SBTi standard.
They can be improved in terms of ambition, time frame (no shorter or longer term targets) and precision, the targets covering emission positions and therefore very different realities.
The rate of emission reduction on scopes 1+2 is slightly below an aligned expectation. The company has solid governance, and has identified business model opportunities in a low-carbon world (in particular renovation services and use of "green" cement).
The engagement policy as publicly described remains limited to generic levers (framework contracts responding to CSR assessments with the possibility of exclusion but without details on the clauses/the concrete activation of this possibility, proposal of low-carbon variants to customers) compared to the target expectations which are to ask its value chain for quantified decarbonization objectives accompanied by an incentive/penalizing economic mechanism.

Narrative Score

The lack of information (particularly on scope 3) does not allow us to fully ensure the credibility and relevance of the company's trajectory.
However, the business model remains generally compatible with a low-carbon universe, and no environmental controversy or significant risk has been identified.
The overall narrative score is therefore C.

Trend score

Given the elements present, it is difficult to form a reliable opinion on the prospects for the evolution of the ACT note in the future.
A "=" factor is therefore favored.

Source
ACT Eval 1
Evaluator
Ekodev
GLOBAL SCORE
Performance score (/100)
34
Disclosure score (/100)
74

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 : 51%

#1

Material Investment Score : 31%

#1

Intangible Investment Score : 38%

#1

Sold Product Performance Score : 0%

#1

Management Score : 74%

#1

Supplier Engagement Score : 9%

#1

Client Engagement Score : 28%

#1

Policy Engagement Score : 40%

#1

Business Model Score : 67%

#1

Indicator weight by module