Hi, is it acceptable to use the MSCI temperature ratings when developing a portfolio temperature rating SBT, or do I have to use the SBTi temperature rating tool?
1 Like
Hi @kfoley,
Currently, MSCI’s temperature rating solution is unfortunately not compliant with the SBTi framework for financial institutions. You can use the SBTi Finance Tool or any other solution, such as those from Urgentem and Bloomberg, as long as it complies with the CDP-WWF Temperature Rating methodology.
Hi @Donald
Thank you for the useful information. Can we use the Trucost temperature rating approach?
Best regards
Hi @sgdl,
As the SBTi Finance Tool is data agnostic, you can use Trucost or any other data source that has the necessary input data. The same goes for any solution that uses the CDP-WWF Temperature Rating (CWTR) method. Currently only CDP, Urgentem and Bloomberg has solutions that align with CWTR. .
1 Like
Hi,
According to the CDP Temperature Rating Methodology, the temperature score for scopes 1,2&3 at company level is calculated like so:
For companies with missing GHG emissions data, 0 was applied which results in the final scope 1,2&3 temperature score being miscalculated. Meaning, the companies with missing GHG emissions data end up with a better (lower) score.
This applies for a lot of companies in my client’s portfolio. Therefore, due to the misleading score, would it be appropriate for my client to:
- disregard those companies (without GHG emissions data) when running the tool in order for my client to be able to set a more ambitious target
- proceed with the scores calculated with the missing GHG emission, that is, using 0 for the missing data
- I am aware that the guide provides a default score (3.2°C) for when there is a missing target, but is there a default score for when the GHG emission data is missing?
Please let me know which you think would be the best way to proceed with calculating the temperature score for my client.
Thank you.