Tata Motors

No leading practices were identified for this company.

No leading practices were identified for this company.

No leading practices were identified for this company.

No leading practices were identified for this company.

Tata Motors has a target to reduce its scope 1 and 2 emissions by 46% by 2030 compared to 2019. However, this target could not be assessed due to missing data regarding base year emissions. The company has also set a target to reduce its downstream scope 3 emissions intensity by 60% by 2029 compared to 2019. However, the company’s reported data was insufficient to provide a meaningful assessment of its historic emissions intensity trend. The company is aiming to achieve net-zero scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions by 2039, but no information was found on its plans to use offsets. Overall, the company needs to increase the transparency of its reporting and significantly improve its data disclosure. The company should also set regular intermediate targets at gaps of no more than five years to incentivise near-term action on its longer-term decarbonisation goals.

Tata Motors has developed a low-carbon transition plan that identifies certain short- and long-term actions, includes some financial content and describes a review and upgrade process. However, the company has not conducted a climate scenario analysis to inform its transition plan and ensure its ambition is sufficient for a 1.5°C pathway. Additionally, while the timescale of Tata Motors’ transition plan extends up to its 2039 net-zero target, the company has not yet set sufficient interim targets. The company has implemented board-level oversight of climate change, but there is no evidence that its board has adequate climate expertise. A lack of expertise at board or equivalent level could be a barrier to successful management of the company’s low-carbon transition. In terms of low-carbon activities, the company is aiming to reach partial electrification of its sold products by 2030. However, it does not publicly commit to fully phasing out its fossil-fuel powered vehicles.

In 2023, Tata Motors invested USD 3.6 billion in research and development (R&D). However, the company does not disclose the proportion of this expenditure dedicated to low-carbon technologies. Similarly, while the company invested USD 2.7 billion in low-carbon capital expenditure (CapEx) in 2023, it does not provide information on its planned low-carbon CapEx for the coming years. In 2021, 3% of the company’s sales consisted of low-carbon vehicles, with only a moderate increase to 7% in 2023. Additionally, while the company may be reducing its downstream scope 3 emissions intensity, the current pace of reduction does not align with the rate required to meet its 1.5°C pathway. Tata Motors needs to step up its ambition and low-carbon vehicle sales to align with its 1.5°C pathway, which requires 67% of automobile sales in 2030 to consist of low-carbon vehicles.

Although Tata Motors has begun to engage with its suppliers, it does not specifically include greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction requirements in its supplier engagement strategy or code of conduct. Creating quantified targets will provide clearer direction to the company’s whole supply chain. There is also no evidence of the impact that the company’s supplier engagement has had. Measuring the impact of its actions will help both the company and its supply chain to monitor the progress being made. Similarly, while Tata Motors has developed a client engagement strategy, this strategy focuses on the promotion of electric vehicles (EVs) rather than GHG emissions reduction, and there is no evidence of the impact the strategy has had. The company can improve transparency by disclosing the proportion of clients its strategy targets by client-related revenue or scope 3 emissions. Tata Motors demonstrates mixed climate policy positioning, given its association with entities that have climate-negative activities or positions. Its subsidiary Jaguar Land Rover has recurrently sought to negatively influence automotive policies. The company should implement processes to review and withdraw from associations that oppose climate policy.

No evidence was found of the company’s commitment to social dialogue or of the categories of stakeholders the company engages with on a just transition. Furthermore, no evidence was found to demonstrate the company’s ongoing social dialogue and meaningful engagement with affected stakeholders. No evidence was found of the company undertaking low-carbon transition planning to mitigate the social impacts of the transition on workers, affected stakeholders and its business relationships. Additionally, no evidence was found to demonstrate the company’s engagement in social dialogue and with stakeholders in its just transition planning. 

The company discloses the actions it takes to create or support access to jobs. For example, it organises hiring drives to find suitable apprentices and undergraduates and has a full-time apprenticeship programme. However, no public commitment by the company was found stating its intention to create and support access to green and decent jobs as part of the low-carbon transition. Moreover, no evidence was found of the company’s actions to promote these jobs in a way that ensures gender balance and inclusion of vulnerable groups. Additionally, no relevant disclosure was found of the company’s assessment of employment dislocation risks. The company discloses the actions it takes to provide reskilling and upskilling opportunities, such as training and education for workers and affected stakeholders. However, no relevant disclosure was found of the company embedding equality of opportunity for women and vulnerable groups in these actions. Furthermore, no evidence was found of the company having a process for identifying skills gaps for workers and affected stakeholders or a public commitment to help workers displaced by the transition to reskill or upskill.

No relevant disclosure was found to show if the company identifies impacts of the low-carbon transition on social protection for workers and affected stakeholders, nor how it contributes to social protection. Additionally, no evidence was found that the company expects its business relationships to contribute to the social protection of their workers and affected stakeholders.  No relevant disclosure was found to show how the company identifies any misalignment of its lobbying activities with policies and regulations that support the just transition, nor of the measures it takes to address misalignment. Furthermore, no evidence was found that the company lobbies for policies and regulations for green and decent job creation; retention, education and reskilling; and social protection for workers. 

The company has a grievance mechanism available to workers and external stakeholders. However, no other policies or commitments of the company related to respect for human rights were found in the public domain. This includes the necessary policies and systems by which the company can ensure respect for basic human rights in its operations and supply chain.

The company commits to respecting the health and safety of its workers and expects the same commitment from its business relationships. However, no evidence was found of the company having a time-bound target for paying all workers a living wage. The company does not disclose the proportion of its direct workforce covered by collective bargaining agreements or its required working hours. It discloses one indicator of workforce diversity: the gender of its workforce by employee category. However, no relevant disclosure was found of additional indicators of workforce diversity. The company commits to gender equality and women’s empowerment and discloses time-bound targets on the subject. It also discloses having at least 30% women in its highest governance body.

The company commits to protecting personal data. However, no evidence was found of the company having a privacy statement regarding the collection, sharing and access to personal data. The company does not disclose its global tax strategy, and no evidence was found of the corporate income tax it pays in each relevant jurisdiction. The company does have a policy prohibiting bribery and corruption, and it includes corresponding clauses in its contracts with business relationships. However, it does not have a lobbying and political engagement policy and no relevant disclosure was found of its expenditure on lobbying activities. The company specifies that it does not make political contributions.