Buzzi Unicem

Buzzi SpA commits to reducing its scope 1 and 2 emissions by 21.2% per tonne of cementitious product by 2030 compared to 2021, aligning with a well-below 2°C pathway. Further, it aims to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.

No leading practices were identified for this company.

No leading practices were identified for this company.

No leading practices were identified for this company.

Buzzi SpA has established a long-term decarbonisation goal along with just one intermediate target. The company should set further intermediate targets at gaps of no more than five years to incentivise near-term action on its longer-term goal. Furthermore, the company saw only a moderate decline in its scope 1 emissions intensity – roughly 1% a year between 2017 and 2022. Its projected future scope 1 and 2 emissions intensity is also not expected to decrease in alignment with its 1.5°C pathway, which requires it to make substantial decreases in its emissions intensity of 2.4% annually between 2022 and 2027. Furthermore, the company’s locked-in emissions from current and planned assets are not expected to stay within its carbon budget for the period between 2023 to 2037.

Buzzi SpA has a Sustainability Steering Committee that maintains oversight of climate issues, but none of the committee members were found to have significant expertise in the low-carbon transition. The company can strengthen its low-carbon transition plan in several ways. For instance, it can provide information on the financial implications and the review and updating process for its transition plan and consider internal carbon pricing. Further, while the company assesses climate-related risks and opportunities through scenario analysis, it should enhance transparency by disclosing the parameters and assumptions used and reporting the results qualitatively and quantitatively. These insights should also inform the development of its transition plan. Currently, 4% of the company’s revenue is aligned with the EU Taxonomy, and the company has an opportunity to increase its low-carbon product revenue in the future. Furthermore, there is room for the company to expand its low-carbon business activities, such as developing zero-clinker cement products or increasing the recycling rate of cement.

The company reports that it achieved a 29.9% thermal substitution rate with alternative fuels primarily sourced from waste material in 2022. However, it can enhance transparency by disclosing the breakdown of the specific waste sources it utilised. Furthermore, it has not publicly disclosed its R&D expenditure for the past three years. Next to reporting this figure, the company should provide associated quantitative data on its investment in low-carbon technologies and a breakdown of its specific investments in both mature- and non-mature climate technologies.

Buzzi SpA lacks public disclosure of supplier and client engagement policies, including information on the scope of its engagement and whether it quantifies emissions reduction targets or has any low-carbon requirements or recommendations for suppliers and clients. The company can also enhance transparency by documenting its recent and current activities relating to supplier and client engagement, along with their respective impacts. Further, the company should establish a policy for engaging with trade associations on climate change issues, complete with a contingency plan to address any misalignment regarding climate positions. Furthermore, while Buzzi SpA publicly commits to the Paris Agreement, the company should implement a monitoring and review process to ensure its policy positions align with the agreement’s goals.

Buzzi SpA commits to reducing its scope 1 and 2 emissions by 21.2% per tonne of cementitious product by 2030 compared to 2021. This is part of its overarching goal to attain carbon neutrality by 2050. Additionally, the company seeks to elevate the proportion of its use of alternative fuels containing biomass to 69.5% by 2050, surpassing the current level twofold. It also aims to boost the adoption of carbon capture and storage technologies to 48%.

Buzzi SpA’s transition plan solely addresses its scope 1 emissions, with no reported data on scope 3 emissions or engagement strategies with suppliers and clients to mitigate their emissions. Additionally, though the company conducts climate change scenario analysis, it does not disclose the results or indicate that it integrates climate change risks and opportunities into its strategy.

Buzzi SpA experienced a modest 1% decline in emissions intensity between 2017 and 2022. The slight decrease in scope 1 emissions can be attributed partly to reduced production levels and, to a lesser degree, to enhanced production efficiency (i.e. reduction in the clinker-to-cement ratio. To align with its 1.5°C pathway, the company needs to achieve significant emissions intensity reductions of 2.4% annually from 2022 to 2027.

In 2022, Buzzi SpA allocated approximately USD 28 million, i.e. about 7.4% of its total annual capital expenditure of USD 285.1 million, towards low-carbon initiatives aligned with the EU Taxonomy. Additionally, the company’s low-carbon revenue aligned with the EU Taxonomy constituted 4% of its 2022 cement-related revenue, totalling USD 115.7 million. The company does not provide detailed information on its low-carbon R&D investments, including a breakdown of its investments in mature- and non-mature climate technologies.

Buzzi SpA plans to reduce its scope 1 and 2 emissions by 21.2% per tonne of cementitious product by 2030 compared to 2021. It also aims to become net zero by 2050. Its transition plan emphasises enhancing efficiency in concrete production and design, reducing clinker content in cements, implementing cost-saving measures in clinker production, adopting recarbonation processes, decarbonising electricity and investing in carbon capture, use and storage technologies.

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.

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. No relevant disclosure was found of the company’s assessment of employment dislocation risks. Further, no public commitment by the company was found stating its intention to reskill and upskill workers displaced by the transition to a low-carbon economy. Additionally, no evidence was found that the company reskills and upskills workers in a way that ensures gender balance and inclusion of vulnerable groups.

No relevant disclosure was found to show if the company identifies the impacts of the low-carbon transition on social protection for workers and affected stakeholders, nor how it contributes to their 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.

While the company is committed to respecting human rights, no other evidence was found of the company’s process to identify, assess and mitigate salient human rights risks in its operations and supply chain. Moreover, no evidence was found of the company disclosing the stakeholders whose human rights have been affected by its activities, or of the company having a grievance mechanism for workers and external stakeholders.

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. While the company discloses the proportion of its direct workforce covered by collective bargaining agreements, no relevant disclosure was found of the company’s required working hours. The company discloses some indicators of workforce diversity, such as the gender of its workforce by employee category.

The company has a publicly available global tax strategy and a policy prohibiting bribery and corruption. However, it can strengthen its disclosure on these subjects as well as on other key ethical business topics, including data protection and lobbying and political engagement.