

Scope 3 emissions in real estate: The elephant in the room
Global real estate companies are often failing to measure or disclose Scope 3 emissions, and this is proving a hurdle when evaluating the sector’s path to net zero.
概要
- Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions remain underreported by the top 200 listed real estate companies, obscuring the path to net zero for the sector
- Only 56% of these property companies disclosed Scope 3 emissions, and more than half of those did not break down emissions at all
- Geographical variance in companies’ carbon disclosure is evident, largely attributed to different regulatory environments
Scope 3 emissions occur along the entire value chain, for example when a building is being used by a lessee. Under the GHG Protocol, Scope 3 emissions are broken down into 15 categories, ranging from upstream emissions including ‘purchased goods and services’, to downstream emissions including leased assets. Among the top 200 largest listed real estate companies, only 56% of them disclosed their Scope 3 emissions in corporate reports, and for those that did, the figures provided are not exhaustive. Scope 3 emissions account for 86% of the overall emissions for companies that have disclosure for all scopes, seven times higher than Scope 1 & 2 (Figure 1). Some geographical variances are notable, with Hong Kong companies reporting only 8% of their emissions coming from Scope 3. This is in reality attributed to data incompleteness rather than the actual emissions.
Figure 1 | Carbon emissions breakdown by scope

Source: Corporate reports, Robeco.
Scope 3 emissions are difficult and expensive to measure due to their indirect nature and the challenge of collecting meaningful data. Figure 2 aggregates carbon emissions for companies in our sample that disclose all Scope 1 & 2, and Scope 3 emissions by category. It illustrates that carbon emissions of real estate companies are dominated by Scope 3 emissions.
了解最新的可持續性市場觀點
訂閱我們的電子報,探索塑造可持續投資的趨勢。
Figure 2 | Carbon emissions breakdown

Source: Corporate reports, Robeco.
Examining each Scope 3 category, Figure 3 shows that downstream categories such as ‘use of sold products’ and ‘downstream leased assets’ are among the most relevant for real estate companies, each accounting for about a quarter of the aggregated Scope 3 emissions respectively. The upstream category of ‘purchased goods and services’ accounts for another quarter.
Figure 3 | Scope 3 emissions breakdown by category

Source: Corporate reports, Robeco.1
Why do some companies disclose Scope 3 emissions?
The primary factor we can see is the regulatory framework the company operates under. This one key factor also explains the wide geographical variance in carbon reporting. Within our universe the leaders in Scope 3 emissions reporting include Great Britain (93%), Australia and New Zealand (75%), and the European Union (73%). On the other hand, the United States (41%) and Singapore (42%) exhibit low levels of disclosure. As demonstrated in Figure 4 below, mandatory carbon disclosure schemes vary across the eight geographies. Governments have a variety of potential policy interventions in their toolbox to support the sustainability transition, and mandatory reporting is an effective one.

Source: OECD, Robeco.
Full disclosure is necessary
Although disclosure is not a sufficient condition for decarbonization of the property sector, it is a necessary one. Credible net-zero pledges require complete and accurate accounting and reporting of all scope emissions and all operations along the value chain. Geographical variances show that the UK is leading in this regard with a mandatory carbon reporting scheme covering all scopes. This highlights the key role governments play in ensuring companies comprehensively assess their environmental impact, thereby paving the way towards a net-zero future.
Footnote
1 The data are sourced from companies in Robeco’s data that disclosed Scope 3 emissions by category.
重要資料
本網站僅供《證券及期貨條例》(香港法例第571章)及其附屬法例所界定之專業投資者瀏覽及使用。 投資涉及風險。過往表現並不代表未來表現。本網站所載資料僅供參考之用,並不構成任何投資建議,亦非作出買賣任何證券或採納任何投資策略之要約或招攬。投資者不應僅憑本網站提供之資料作出投資決定,在作出任何投資決定前,應徵詢獨立意見(包括有關稅務影響之意見)。投資者應確保完全理解投資產品的相關風險,亦應考量自身投資目標及風險承受水平。投資乃閣下之個人決定。除非銷售投資產品的中介人已向閣下告知該投資產品適合閣下,並已解釋其符合閣下投資目標之原因,否則閣下不應投資。請參閱相關發售文件或其他法律文件,以獲取包括風險因素在內的進一步詳情。 本網站由荷寶投資管理香港有限公司發布,該公司受香港證券及期貨事務監察委員會(「證監會」)規管(中央編號:APU851)。本網站未經證監會審閱。 無法保證任何投資產品可實現其投資目標。概不就任何投資產品之表現或投資回報作任何聲明或承諾。投資的價值或會波動。本網站所載過往表現、推算或預測,均不應視作未來表現之保證或指標,且概不提供任何明示或暗示之保證。本網站內容建基於相信為可靠之來源,惟因應資料傳遞技術特性及須採用多項數據來源(包括第三方內容),故概不保證其準確性。所述觀點僅乃截至上述日期,或會隨市況變化而改變,可予更改而毋須另行通知。該等意見可能有別於其他荷寶投資專業人士之意見。因使用本材料或當中所載任何評論、意見或估算而引致之直接、間接或相應損失,荷寶概不承擔法律責任。荷寶並無責任更新本網站或任何網站內容。未經荷寶事先書面許可,不得複製、分發或刊發本網站任何材料。 除非另有說明,資料來源:荷寶。





























