Pharmaceutical Company Targets and Strategies to Address Climate Change: Content Analysis of Public Reports from 20 Pharmaceutical Companies
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Terminology
1.2. Evolution of Corporate Climate Change Reporting
- Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) standards: International standard that aids businesses in reporting on issues including climate change, human rights, and corruption (1997) [13];
- Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB): Industry-specific disclosure standards across ESG topics with a focus on sustainability and financial fundamentals (2011) [14];
- Taskforce for Climate-related Financial Disclosure (TCFD): Provides companies with recommendations for reporting climate-related financial risks (2015) [15].
1.3. Literature Review: Pharmaceutical Industry GHG Emissions
1.4. Research Questions
- (a)
- What public targets have pharmaceutical companies set to reduce their GHG emissions and are these aligned with international standards?
- (b)
- What GHG emissions are pharmaceutical companies reporting, with what (if any) reductions, and using which reporting standards?
- (c)
- What steps are pharmaceutical companies taking to reduce their GHG emissions?
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Sample
2.2. Data Collection
2.3. Analysis and Synthesis
3. Results
3.1. Overview of Pharmaceutical Companies
3.2. Location of Data
3.3. Reported GHG Emission Reduction Targets
3.4. Alignment of Company Targets with International Standards
- 20 reported aligning their climate change reporting with the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals;
- 19 with the UN Global Compact initiative;
- 18 with the Paris Agreement;
- 16 with the Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi);
- 10 with the targets outlined in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report;
- one with the 2 °C scenario;
- one with the commitments of the European Green Deal which aims to reduce emissions by 50% by 2030 and become climate neutral by 2050.
3.5. Progress on Targets: Scope 1, 2, and 3 GHG Emission Reporting Standards
3.6. Progress on Targets: Scope 1, 2, and 3 GHG Emissions and Reported Change from Baseline
3.7. GHG Emission Reduction Strategies
4. Discussion
4.1. Strengths and Limitations
4.2. Implications for Practice
4.3. Implications for Further Research
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Pichler, P.; Jaccard, I.; Weisz, U.; Weisz, H. International comparison of health care carbon footprints. Environ. Res. Lett. 2019, 14, 064004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Atwoli, L.; Baqui, A.H.; Benfield, T.; Bosurgi, R.; Godlee, F.; Hancocks, S.; Horton, R.; Laybourn-Langton, L.; Monteiro, C.A.; Norman, I.; et al. Call for emergency action to limit global temperature increases, restore biodiversity, and protect health. BMJ 2021, 374, n1734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Delivering a ‘Net Zero’ National Health Service; NHS: England, UK, 2020.
- Tennison, I.; Roschnik, S.; Ashby, B.; Boyd, R.; Hamilton, I.; Oreszcyn, T. Health care’s response to climate change: A carbon footprint assessment of the NHS in England. Lancet Planet. Health 2021, 5, 84–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wu, R. The carbon footprint of the Chinese health-care system: An environmentally extended input-output and structural path analysis study. Lancet Planet Health 2019, 3, e413–e419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Latapí Agudelo, M.A.; Jóhannsdóttir, L.; Davídsdóttir, B. A literature review of the history and evolution of corporate social responsibility. Int. J. Corp. Soc. Responsib. 2019, 4, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IPCC. Glossary—Global Warming of 1.5: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; 2022. Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/glossary/ (accessed on 26 January 2023).
- United Nations. The Sustainable Development Goals: Department of Economic Social Affairs 2015. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/goals (accessed on 15 November 2022).
- United Nations. Adoption of the Paris Agreement. In Proceedings of the Conference of the Parties, Paris, France, 30 November–11 December 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014; European Parliament and of the Council: Brussels, Belgium, 2014.
- The Companies Act 2006 (Strategic Report and Directors’ Report) Regulations 2013; Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs: London, UK, 2013.
- Who Care Wins: Connecting Financial Markets to a Changing World; United Nations: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2004; Available online: https://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/topics_ext_content/ifc_external_corporate_site/sustainability-at-ifc/publications/publications_report_whocareswins__wci__1319579355342 (accessed on 20 March 2022).
- GRI Standards; Global Reporting Initiative: Boston, MA, USA, 2021; Available online: https://www.globalreporting.org/standards/. (accessed on 20 March 2022).
- SASB Standards; Value Reporting Foundation: London, UK, 2021; Available online: https://www.sasb.org/ (accessed on 20 March 2022).
- Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures 2022. Available online: https://www.fsb-tcfd.org/ (accessed on 20 March 2022).
- The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: Technical Report; World Resources Institute: Washington, DC, USA; World Business Council for Sustainable Development: Geneva, Switzerland, 2000.
- Ambitious Corporate Climate Action Science Based Targets; 2021. Available online: https://sciencebasedtargets.org/ (accessed on 6 January 2022).
- Carbon Disclosure Project: CDP. 2022. Available online: https://www.cdp.net/en (accessed on 20 March 2022).
- Belkhir, L.; Elmeligi, A. Carbon footprint of the global pharmaceutical industry and relative impact of its major players. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 214, 185–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ray, A.; Sharma, S.; Sadasivam, B. Carbovigilance: Curtailing the global pharmaceutical carbon footprint. Future Healthc. J. 2021, 8, e683–e685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, Z.; Geng, Y.; Wu, R.; Chen, W.; Wu, F.; Tian, X. Analysis of energy-related CO2 emissions in China’s pharmaceutical industry and its driving forces. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 223, 94–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, M.; Tan, R. How to reduce CO2 emissions in pharmaceutical industry of China: Evidence from total-factor carbon emissions performance. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 337, 130505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adams, C.A. The ethical, social and environmental reporting—performance portrayal gap. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2004, 17, 731–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schneider, J.L.; Wilson, A.; Rosenbeck, J.M. Pharmaceutical companies and sustainability: An analysis of corporate reporting. Benchmarking Int. J. 2010, 17, 421–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaturvedi, U.; Sharma, M.; Dangayach, G.S.; Sarkar, P. Evolution and adoption of sustainable practices in the pharmaceutical industry: An overview with an Indian perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 168, 1358–1369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Demir, M.; Min, M. Consistencies and discrepancies in corporate social responsibility reporting in the pharmaceutical industry. Sustain. Account. Manag. Policy J. 2019, 10, 333–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Begley, A. The complex relationship between biopharmaceuticals and sustainbility. Eur. Pharm. Rev. 2021. Available online: https://www.europeanpharmaceuticalreview.com/article/165033/the-complex-relationship-between-biopharmaceuticals-and-sustainability/ (accessed on 20 March 2022).
- Watson, W. How do the fine chemical, pharmaceutical, and related industries approach green chemistry and sustainability? Green Chem. 2011, 14, 251–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Downe-Wamboldt, B. Content analysis: Method, applications, and issues. Health Care Women Int. 1992, 13, 313–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bengtsson, M. How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. Nurs. Open 2016, 2, 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christel, M. 2021 Pharm Exec Top 50 Companies. Pharm. Exec. 2021. Available online: https://www.pharmexec.com/view/2021-pharma-50 (accessed on 20 March 2022).
- Ledley, F.D.; McCoy, S.S.; Vaughan, G.; Cleary, E.G. Profitability of Large Pharmaceutical Companies Compared with Other Large Public Companies. JAMA 2020, 323, 834–843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Milne, M.J.; Adler, R.W. Exploring the reliability of social and environmental disclosures content analysis. Account. Audit. Account. J. 1999, 12, 237–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soto, M.; Bhatia, P.; Cummis, C.E.; Didden, M.; Kovac, A.; Ryor, J.; Stevens, A. Scope 2 Executive Summary. World Resour. Inst. 2015. Available online: https://www.wri.org/research/ghg-protocol-scope-2-guidance (accessed on 20 March 2022).
- Hansen, A.D.; Kuramochi, T.; Wicke, B. The status of corporate greenhouse gas emissions reporting in the food sector: An evaluation of food and beverage manufacturers. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 361, 132279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klaaßen, L.; Stoll, C. Harmonizing corporate carbon footprints. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 6149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Solikhah, B.; Wahyuningrum, I.F.S.; Yulianto, A.; Sarwono, E.; Widiatami, A.K. Carbon emission reporting: A review baed on environmental performance, company age and corporate governance. Earth Environ. Sci. 2021, 623, 012042. [Google Scholar]
- Gouldson, A.; Sullivan, R. Long-term corporate climate change targets: What could they deliver? Environ. Sci. Policy 2013, 27, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Forin, S.; Scholz, R. Are medicines more greenhouse gas intensive than cars? Comment to Belkhir, L., Elmeligi, A., 2019: Carbon footprint of the global pharmaceutical industry and relative impact of its major players. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 331, 129963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, K. Emerging phenomenon of corporate sustainability reporting: Evidence from top 100 NSE listed companies in India. J. Public Aff. 2022, 22, e2368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- GRI and SASB Reporting ‘Complement Each Other’; Global Reporting Initiative: Boston, MA, USA, 2021; Available online: https://www.globalreporting.org/news/news-center/gri-and-sasb-reporting-complement-each-other/ (accessed on 20 March 2022).
- International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) Exposure Draft Consultations: UK Government Response; Department for Business: London, UK, 2022. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/international-sustainability-standards-board-issb-exposure-draft-consultations-uk-government-response (accessed on 20 March 2022).
- Doda, B.; Gennaioli, C.; Gouldson, A.; Grover, D.; Sullivan, R. Are Corporate Carbon Management Practices Reducing Corporate Carbon Emissions? Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2016, 23, 257–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farsan, A.; Chang, A.; Kerkhof, A.; Cserna, B.; Yan, C. Value change in the value chain: Best practices in scope 3 greenhouse gas management. Sci. Based Targets 2018. Available online: https://sciencebasedtargets.org/resources/files/SBT_Value_Chain_Report-1.pdf (accessed on 20 March 2022).
- Wernet, G.; Conradt, S.; Isenring, H.P.; Jimenez-Gonzalez, C.; Hungerbuehler, K. Life cycle assessment of fine chemical production: A case study of pharmaceutical synthesis. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2010, 15, 294–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, S.; Jimenez-Gonzalez, C.; Dale, B.E. Enzymes for pharmaceutical applications-a cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2009, 14, 392–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Slater, C.S.; Savelski, M.J.; Ruiz-Felix, M.N. Life cycle analysis of solvent reduction in pharmaceutical synthesis using continuous adsorption for palladium removal. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A 2013, 48, 1602–1608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lang, C.; Byakola, T. A Funny Place to Store Carbon: UWA-FACE Foundation’s Tree Planting Project in Mount Elgon National Park, Uganda; World Rainforest Movement: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- GHG Management Hierarchy Updates for Net-Zero: IEMA; 2022. Available online: https://www.iema.net/articles/ghg-management-hierarchy-updated-for-net-zero (accessed on 12 October 2022).
- Milanesi, M.; Runfola, A.; Guercini, S. Pharmaceutical industry riding the wave of sustainability: Review and opportunities for future research. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 261, 121204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saxena, K.; Balani, S.; Srivastava, P. The relationship among corporate social responsibility, sustainability and organizational performance in pharmaceutical sector: A literature review. Int. J. Pharm. Healthc. Mark. 2021, 15, 572–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Córdova Román, C.; Zorio-Grima, A.; Merello, P. Economic development and CSR assurance: Important drivers for carbon reporting… yet inefficient drivers for carbon management? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 163, 120424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Freitas Netto, S.V.; Sobral, M.F.F.; Ribeiro, A.R.B.; Soares, G.R.D.L. Concepts and forms of greenwashing: A systematic review. Environ. Sci. Eur. 2020, 32, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Company Name | Headquarters | 2020 Annual Revenue (Billion USD) | Number of Employees |
---|---|---|---|
Roche | Switzerland | 47.5 | >90,000 |
Novartis | Switzerland | 47.2 | >100,000 |
AbbVie | USA | 44.3 | >47,000 |
Johnson & Johnson (J&J) | USA | 43.1 | >130,000 |
Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) | USA | 41.9 | >30,000 |
Merck & Co. | USA | 41.4 | >74,000 |
Sanofi | France | 35.8 | >100,000 |
Pfizer | USA | 35.6 | >78,000 |
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) | UK | 30.6 | >99,000 |
Takeda | Japan | 27.9 | >50,000 |
AstraZeneca | UK | 25.5 | >76,000 |
Amgen | USA | 24.1 | >22,000 |
Gilead | USA | 23.8 | >11,000 |
Eli Lilly | USA | 22.6 | >35,000 |
Novo Nordisk (NN) | Denmark | 19.4 | >45,000 |
Bayer | Germany | 18.9 | >99,500 |
Boehringer Ingelheim (BI) | Germany | 16.5 | >47,000 |
Astellas | Japan | 11.5 | >15,000 |
Viatris | USA | 11.5 | >45,000 |
Teva | Israel | 11.0 | >40,000 |
Total | 20 | 580.4 | >1,200,000 |
Greenhouse Gas Emission Scopes and Categories | Emission Reduction Strategy * | Company | Number (Proportion) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Scopes 1 and 2 | Energy | Increase renewable energy purchased/install onsite renewable energy | Roche; Novartis; AbbVie; J&J; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; Pfizer; GSK; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk; Bayer; BI; Astellas; Viatris; Teva | 20 (100%) |
Reduce operational energy use, e.g., use of energy efficient equipment, timers on equipment | Roche; Novartis; AbbVie; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; Pfizer; GSK; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordis; Bayer; BI; Astellas; Viatris; Teva | 19 (95%) | ||
Optimize energy use in building design e.g., optimize heating, ventilation and air conditioning, install LED lights, obtain ISO/LEED certification | Novartis; AbbVie; J&J; BMS; Merck & Co; Pfizer; Sanofi; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk; Bayer; BI; Astellas; Viatris; Teva | 18 (90%) | ||
Optimize own manufacturing process through green chemistry principles, e.g., increased efficiency of process, reduced water and energy use | Roche; Novartis; AbbVie; J&J; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; Pfizer; GSK; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk; Bayer; BI; Astellas; Teva | 19 (95%) | ||
Company-owned vehicles | Convert to energy efficient vehicle fleet, e.g., hybrid or electric | Novartis; AbbVie; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; GSK; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk; Astellas | 13 (65%) | |
Scope 3 | Purchased goods/services | Implement sustainability criteria in vendor selection processes and encouraging suppliers to disclose environmental performance (e.g., through platforms such as EcoVadis) | Roche; Novartis; AbbVie; J&J; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; Pfizer; GSK; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk; Bayer; BI; Astellas; Viatris; Teva | 20 (100%) |
Assist suppliers to convert to renewable energy in their manufacturing processes | Roche; Novartis; J&J; Merck & Co; Sanofi; Pfizer; GSK; AZ; Amgen; Novo Nordisk; Bayer; Viatris; Takeda | 13 (65%) | ||
Source raw materials responsibly (e.g., reduce hazardous substances and precious metals in production processes, use recycled materials in packaging, and ensure protection of biodiversity in sourcing) | Roche; Novartis; AbbVie; J&J; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; Pfizer; GSK; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk; Bayer; BI; Astellas; Viatris; Teva | 20 (100%) | ||
Reduce water consumption or engage in water recycling or reuse projects | Roche; Novartis; AbbVie; J&J; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; Pfizer; GSK; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk; Bayer; BI; Astellas; Viatris; Teva | 20 (100%) | ||
Capital goods | Bought buildings are assessed for environmental sustainability and energy efficiency | Roche; AbbVie; BMS; Sanofi; Pfizer; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Merck & Co | 9 (45%) | |
Transportation and distribution | Converting from air to sea/land distribution | Novartis; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; Takeda; AZ; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk; Bayer | 9 (45%) | |
Implement technology to determine lowest carbon route of transport and distribution | J&J; Eli Lilly | 2 (10%) | ||
Waste production | Efforts to reduce waste generated from manufacturing process | Roche; AbbVie; Novartis; J&J; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; GSK; Pfizer; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk; Bayer; BI; Astellas; Viatris; Teva | 20 (100%) | |
Improvement of recycling rates and reuse of waste | Roche; Novartis; AbbVie; J&J; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; Pfizer; GSK; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk; Bayer; BI; Astellas; Viatris; Teva | 20 (100%) | ||
Reduce waste to landfill | Roche; AbbVie; J&J; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; GSK; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Astellas; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk; BI; Viatris | 16 (80%) | ||
Implement E-labelling to reduce packaging waste | BMS; Takeda; AZ; Astellas | 4 (20%) | ||
Efforts to reduce food waste | Novartis; J&J; BMS; Sanofi; Gilead | 5 (25%) | ||
Implement auditing of waste and recycling vendors | Roche; AbbVie; Pfizer; Astellas | 4 (20%) | ||
Business travel | Reduce business travel | Roche; Pfizer; BMS; Sanofi; GSK; Takeda; AZ; Novo Nordisk; Bayer; BI | 10 (50%) | |
Encourage train instead of air travel | Sanofi; Merck & Co | 2 (10%) | ||
Employee commuting | Encourage remote working | Novartis; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; GSK; Viatris; | 6 (30%) | |
Provide alternative low-carbon ways to get to work (e.g., electric buses to transport staff, charging points at work) | Novartis; Sanofi; Takeda; Bayer | 4 (20%) | ||
Leased assets | Assess leased facilities for energy efficiency | Merck & Co | 1 (5%) | |
Processing and use of sold products | Use propellant with lower climate impact in inhalers | GSK; AZ | 2 (10%) | |
Encourage recycling of insulin syringes | Novo Nordisk | 1 (5%) | ||
End-of-life management | Introduce take-back programs for products/promote responsible consumer disposal | Roche; J&J; Sanofi; Pfizer; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk | 9 (45%) | |
Monitoring system or wastewater treatment systems for pharmaceuticals in the environment | Roche; Novartis; AbbVie; J&J; BMS; Merck & Co; Sanofi; Pfizer; GSK; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Gilead; Eli Lilly; Novo Nordisk; Bayer; BI; Astellas; Viatris; Teva | 20 (100%) | ||
All: | Carbon offsets | Support tree planting, anti-deforestation initiatives, water and waste management projects etc., | Novartis; J&J; BMS; Merck & Co; Pfizer; GSK; Takeda; AZ; Amgen; Eli Lilly; Bayer; BI; Teva | 13 (65%) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Booth, A.; Jager, A.; Faulkner, S.D.; Winchester, C.C.; Shaw, S.E. Pharmaceutical Company Targets and Strategies to Address Climate Change: Content Analysis of Public Reports from 20 Pharmaceutical Companies. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 3206. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043206
Booth A, Jager A, Faulkner SD, Winchester CC, Shaw SE. Pharmaceutical Company Targets and Strategies to Address Climate Change: Content Analysis of Public Reports from 20 Pharmaceutical Companies. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(4):3206. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043206
Chicago/Turabian StyleBooth, Amy, Alexandra Jager, Stuart D Faulkner, Christopher C Winchester, and Sara E Shaw. 2023. "Pharmaceutical Company Targets and Strategies to Address Climate Change: Content Analysis of Public Reports from 20 Pharmaceutical Companies" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20, no. 4: 3206. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043206