Assessing the Usability of Supplier-Specific Product Carbon Footprint Data for Scope 3 Reporting

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides empirical evidence on the usability of PACT Level 1 data and the practical limits of best-practice frameworks.

🏢実務担当者:Offers guidance on when partially complete supplier PCF data can be used for internal Scope 3 reporting and supplier engagement.

🏛政策担当者:Highlights the need for realistic expectations and phased adoption of PCF standards in disclosure regulations.

Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions account for a major share of corporate climate impacts, yet their quantification remains challenging due to limited control over value-chain data and varying supplier data maturity. Supplier-specific Product Carbon Footprints (PCFs) offer a more representative alternative to spend-based estimation methods, but supplier PCF disclosures often fall short of best-practice methodological standards. This thesis empirically applies and assesses the Partnership for Carbon Transparency (PACT) framework and PACTs PCF Data in Practice Usability Model in a buyer-supplier context to examine how partially complete PCF data aligns with usability criteria and under what conditions such data can be considered usable for Scope 3 reporting. Using a qualitative case study of a large Swedish company and two of its suppliers, the study analyses supplier-disclosed PCF data against PACT’s PCF Levels and fit-for-purpose matrix. The findings show that supplier-provided PCF data primarily aligns with PACT Level 1, with partial elements of Level 2, while higher-level requirements related to data quality, structured metadata, and methodological transparency are largely unmet. Under a strict application of the PACT usability model, the datasets do not fulfil the criteria required for formal usability, which would exclude the use of supplier PCF data in scope 3 reporting. However, such a strict interpretation is difficult to apply in practice. The study identifies key challenges, including limited supplier familiarity with PACT, inconsistent data structures, high reporting effort, and constraints related to data availability and disclosure. Importantly, many data gaps were found to stem not from a lack of underlying data, but from difficulties in structuring and communicating information in a standardised format. Despite these limitations, the findings demonstrate that supplier-specific PCF data can still be appropriate to use for internal Scope 3 reporting and is beneficial for climate reduction efforts under certain conditions. When limitations and uncertainties are transparently communicated, partially complete data can provide more representative insights than spend-based methods and support hotspot identification, supplier engagement, and initial emission reduction efforts. The study highlights a gap between best-practice frameworks and current industry capabilities. While PACT provides a robust methodological benchmark, its requirements may exceed what is feasible in early-stage buyer-supplier relationships. The results therefore support a more pragmatic and phased approach, where fewer but more relevant data points are prioritised to enable gradual improvement. The findings are likely relevant beyond the case context, as many organisations are in early stages of transitioning towards supplier-specific emissions data. Overall, the study demonstrates that even imperfect data can create value by improving transparency and supporting more informed Scope 3 management over time.

• openalex http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-591048first seen 2026-08-02 19:05:12