Singapore Airlines is a publicly listed company headquartered in Singapore. In 2021 its revenue was USD 5.52 billion. The company is the national airline of Singapore and flies to 98 destinations globally. Its business was significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of passengers dropped from 35.8 million in 2019 to 0.6 million and 3.8 million in 2020 and 2021 respectively.
Singapore Airlines has a single target to reach net-zero scope 1 and 2 emissions by 2050. However, it is not possible to assess the alignment of the target with the company’s 1.5°C pathway because the company is reliant on carbon offsets as a major aspect of its decarbonisation strategy. The company can improve its targets by emphasising direct action to reduce emissions instead of relying on offsets. Moreover, the company lacks any short- or mid-term targets. Setting intermediate targets with intervals of no more than five years can drive ongoing accountability for managing emissions and guide the company’s strategic decisions.
Singapore Airlines’ freight emissions intensity decreased by 16% between 2016 and 2019. This would align with the company’s 1.5°C pathway for 2021-2026. However, the company’s passenger operations, which represented 80% of absolute emissions generated in 2021, saw its emissions intensity increase slightly during the same period. In 2020, the company’s emissions intensity increased significantly due to the impact of reduced passenger numbers during COVID-19. There is limited evidence that the company will decrease emissions at the rate required to meet its 1.5°C pathway by 2026 across its operations. To improve its future performance, the company should commit to investing in low-carbon aircraft and fuels.
Singapore Airlines demonstrates elements of transition planning but it lacks a detailed decarbonisation pathway. The company is focused on short-term improvements, such as increasing its use of sustainable aviation fuels (SAF), purchasing more efficient aircraft, improving air traffic management systems and carbon offsetting. There is no evidence that the company is planning a significant shift towards low-carbon business activities. Singapore Airlines will be required by the Singapore Stock Exchange to undertake climate scenario analysis from 2023. This represents an opportunity to develop an understanding of climate risks and embed learnings into a robust transition plan. It should ensure that the plan is long-term and also includes financial commitments towards decarbonisation.
Singapore Airlines receives a trend score of -. If the company were reassessed in the near future, its score would likely decrease. Despite plans to begin climate change scenario analysis, the company lacks a comprehensive long-term transition plan to reduce emissions. Moreover, Singapore Airlines’ 2050 net-zero target is undermined by its reliance on offsets. Based on the company’s performance in 2021, it is projected to greatly exceed its carbon budget between 2022 and 2036 . Without commitments to purchase low-carbon aircraft or fuels in the future and develop a long-term transition plan, it is unlikely that the company will align with its 1.5°C pathway.
Singapore Airlines has set a target to reach net-zero scope 1 and 2 emissions by 2050. However, the target includes an undisclosed level of reliance on carbon offsets. The company has not set any intermediate targets to drive near-term action.
Singapore Airlines has invested in new passenger and freight aircraft that will be delivered starting 2025. It has also started purchasing SAF. However, the company is not pursuing any low-carbon activities at scale.
The company was significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Between 2016 and 2019, its scope 1 passenger emissions intensity increased by 1% per year on average before increasing ten-fold in 2020. The company’s scope 1 freight emissions intensity, on the other hand, decreased by at least 5% per year on average, before doubling in 2020.
Singapore Airlines does not disclose a long-term strategy or financial commitment to meet its 2050 net-zero target. Its current actions lack the ambition to deliver sufficient emissions reductions. For example, the company has agreed to purchase 1.25 million litres of SAF, but this represented less than 0.05% of its conventional fuel use in 2021.
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.
The company discloses the actions it takes to provide training opportunities for workers and affected stakeholders. For instance, it has an upskilling plan for employees and supports educational opportunities in communities the company serves and operates in. 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.
While the company has a grievance mechanism available to workers and external stakeholders to report human rights concerns, 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 publishes some workforce diversity information, and the proportion of its direct workforce covered by collective bargaining agreements. The company also expects its suppliers to respect the health and safety of their workers. However, the company can strengthen its disclosure on these subjects as well as on other key issues related to decent work practices, including the provision of secure, safe and healthy workplaces, where workers are fairly remunerated and have a meaningful say in decision-making.
The company includes clauses preventing bribery and corruption in its agreements with business relationships and offers a grievance mechanism to all stakeholders to report bribery and corruption. However, the company can strengthen its disclosure on these and other key ethical business topics, including personal data protection, tax, bribery and corruption, and lobbying and political engagement.