Japan Airlines

JAL has set an ambitious net-zero target for 2050 and does not intend to use offsets. The company has also set a mid-term target to reduce its scope 1 emissions by 10% by 2030 compared to 2019. The scale of this mid-term target implies JAL is relying on future technologies to achieve its net-zero goal. The company can improve its performance by setting regularly spaced intermediate targets, which will incentivise near-term actions on the company’s longer-term goals. Further, the company should disclose freight and passenger emissions separately.

JAL supports the Green Growth Strategy of the Japanese government, is a member of numerous climate-positive initiatives and has announced its support for the recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD). However, the company’s CEO remains on the board of the International Air Transport Association (IATA). This membership undermines the company’s positive climate advocacy as IATA has actively opposed numerous measures to decarbonise aviation. The company can increase its credibility by setting a clear position on climate policy and by implementing processes to withdraw from trade associations that oppose positive climate policies.

JAL collaborates with manufacturers on R&D. This includes promoting electrified and hydrogen-fuelled aircraft, building a supply chain of Japanese-made sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and trialling drone logistics. The company has a Supplier Code of Conduct, which requires suppliers to reduce their emissions. Moreover, through JAL Green Operations, the company is also engaging with infrastructure operators. The company can further all of this work by setting science-based targets to reduce specific value chain emissions for its operations. It should also encourage the manufacturers, operators and suppliers it works with to set their own targets.

The company saw a significant increase in its emissions intensity in 2020. This is partly due to the impact of lower passenger numbers during the COVID-19 pandemic on the transport industry. However, between 2016 and 2019 the company failed to make the required reductions to align with its 1.5°C pathway. JAL is projected to greatly exceed its total 1.5°C carbon budget for the period 2021-2035. The company has clear plans for decarbonisation but needs to increase its rate of implementation in order to overturn the trends to date.

JAL has set a target to reach net-zero scope 1 and 2 emissions by 2050. It also has an interim target to reduce its scope 1 emissions by 10% by 2030 compared to 2019. The company does not plan to use offsets to reach its targets. However, JAL’s targets are not science-based.

In the short term, JAL expects to achieve 6% of its net-zero emissions reductions through equipment renewal and 3.5% by increasing the use of SAF to 10% of its fuel mix. In the long term, the company plans to replace short flights with hydrogen and electric power. However, the company does not report further detail on this.

JAL is working with manufacturers and universities to promote R&D of electric and hydrogen-fuelled aircraft. It is also partnering to build a supply of Japanese-made SAF. Furthermore, the company is collaborating with infrastructure operators to reduce ground emissions and fly more efficient routes.

The company’s reported emissions intensity decreased by approximately 3% per year from 2016 to 2019. However, this trend was not aligned with the company’s 1.5°C pathway. In 2020, the company saw a dramatic increase in emissions intensity due to COVID-19.

JAL’s strategy and targets suggest it is committed to the low-carbon transition. However, the company will need to reduce its emissions intensity by 3.8% annually to align with its 1.5°C pathway. Taking into consideration the impact of COVID-19, the company will likely need to accelerate its plans to achieve this.

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 or engagement 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 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 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 commits to respecting human rights and the ILO fundamental rights at work, and it expects its business relationships to respect the ILO fundamental rights at work. Furthermore, the company discloses a human rights due diligence process that includes the identification and assessment of salient human rights risks, such as supply chain management, products and services, and the internal environment. The company has a system to mitigate these risks in its own operations. Additionally, the company has a grievance mechanism available to workers to report human rights concerns.

The company expects its suppliers to protect the health and safety of their workers and has a process to monitor that they do. The company also commits to gender equality and women’s empowerment and discloses some indicators of workforce diversity, including the age and gender of its workforce by employee category. However, the company can strengthen its disclosure on these subjects, as well as on its living wage and working hours practices.

The company has an anti-bribery and anti-corruption public policy. However, the company can strengthen its disclosure on this subject and other key ethical business topics, including personal data protection, tax, and lobbying and political engagement.