CITIC Pacific Special Steel

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.

CITIC Pacific Special Steel has not publicly disclosed emissions reduction targets for any of its scope 1, 2 or 3 emissions originating from its operations or its supply chain. The company should develop a long-term target that aligns with a 1.5°C pathway and covers its scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. Additionally, it should set intermediate targets at gaps of no more than five years to incentivise near-term action on longer-term goals. There is no evidence that the company discloses its emissions from 2017 to 2022. To demonstrate a commitment to transition, companies should disclose at least five years of historic emissions data.

There is no evidence that CITIC Pacific Special Steel has a low-carbon transition plan. The company should establish a time-bound action plan that outlines how it will transition to a low-carbon economy. This should include medium- and long-term targets, verifiable and quantifiable key performance indicators and financial commitments. Further, the plan should be informed by climate scenario analysis to ensure that its ambition aligns with a 1.5°C pathway. There is also no evidence that CITIC Pacific Special Steel has implemented board-level oversight of climate change. In addition, there is no evidence that the company has developed or is developing low-carbon activities outside of its core business.

The lack of company disclosure of climate and emissions data inhibits a full view of its decarbonisation progress and plans. To demonstrate its commitment to transition, CITIC Pacific Special Steel should disclose at least five years of historic emissions data. The company has also not disclosed its research and development (R&D) expenditure in the last three years, nor has it provided quantitative data on its investment in low-carbon technologies.

CITIC Pacific Special Steel lacks both supplier and client engagement strategies to promote emissions reduction and the low-carbon transition. The company should consider providing clear guidance on how it expects its supply chain to align with a low-carbon transition. Moreover, the company should establish and disclose a policy for engaging with trade associations on climate change, and it should consider publicly committing to the Paris Agreement as well as actively participating in initiatives to strengthen its commitment to emissions reduction.

CITIC Pacific Special Steel does not publicly disclose its emissions data and does not have emissions reduction targets for any of its scope 1, 2 or 3 emissions originating from its operations or its supply chain.

CITIC Pacific Special Steel’s lack of targets, strategy and emissions intensity data all suggest that the company is not yet committed to the low-carbon transition.

The company lacks adequate disclosure of scope 1 and 2 emissions data from 2015 to 2020 to allow for a meaningful assessment of its historical emissions intensity trend.

CITIC Pacific Special Steel does not provide information regarding its low-carbon capital expenditure and low-carbon mitigation R&D. The company also does not disclose whether it is creating or expanding low-carbon business models or implementing actions to decarbonise activities within its existing business models.

CITIC Pacific Special Steel does not have a transition plan and there is no evidence it intends to develop one in the near future.

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 action 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. No public commitment by the company was found stating its intention to re- and up-skill workers displaced by the transition to a low-carbon economy. Additionally, no evidence was found that the company re- and up-skills workers in a way that ensures gender balance and inclusion of vulnerable groups.

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.

No 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 discloses some indicators of workforce diversity, including the age and gender of its workforce by employee category. However, no other evidence of the company’s policies or commitments related to key decent work issues were found in the public domain. These issues include the provision of secure, safe and healthy workplaces, where workers are fairly renumerated and have a meaningful say in decision-making.

While the company describes the process to identify its bribery and corruption risks, no other policies or commitments of the company related to key ethical business topics – personal data protection, tax, bribery and corruption, and lobbying and political engagement – were found in the public domain. This includes ensuring ethical business conduct throughout its operations and in its relationships with business partners.