There are many ESG initiatives that seem so important to companies, but corporate resources are limited, so trade-offs often have to be made. Balancing long-term environmental and social impacts with short-term profits is one of the biggest challenges for companies. Another example I've seen in conversations with companies was the reduction of Scope 3 GHG emissions versus supplier benefits. One of the ways to prioritize these ESG initiatives is to assess materiality. For reference, I have put together some examples of the materiality matrix from recent corporate sustainability reports. I found that Altria, a tobacco company, has done this materiality assessment on a large scale. They surveyed 9500 people who are stakeholders, such as employees, consumers, growers, suppliers, trading partners, government officials, communities, NGOs, etc. They spend 4 pages explaining the methodology in their sustainability report. If you look at GM's materiality matrix, it says that developing the electric vehicle market is most important, and they use the matrix to support their corporate strategy, which focuses on electric mobility and sends clear messages to readers. Conducting a materiality analysis and communicating about it in sustainability reports becomes very important.

1, Altria 2020 Materiality Matrix

Source: Altria Engage and Lead Responsibility: 2020 - 2021 (P.14) 

2, GM 2019 Materiality Matrix

 Source: GM 2019 Sustainability Report (P.32)

3, PG&E Materiality Matrix (2017)

Source: PG&E  Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability Report 2020 (P.6) 

4, American Express Materiality Matrix

Source: American Express 2019-2020 ESG Report (P.10) 

5, eBay Materiality Matrix

Source: eBay Impact 2019 Report  (P.7)

President Biden recommitted the United States to the Paris climate agreement. "Green New Deal"-type stimulus to recover from COVID-19 is being considered not only in the U.S., but also in many other places around the world. As environmental awareness increases, it appears that corporate efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will accelerate in the coming years. 

This time, I compare automobile companies because GHG emissions from the transportation sector are significant and automobile manufacturers play an important role in this. 

First, I compared GHG emissions data from three automakers, Toyota, Volkswagen, and GM, that have disclosed detailed GHG emissions data in their environmental reports. (I also checked Daimler, Ford, and Tesla, but I could not find specific Scope 3 GHG emissions data in their sustainability reports.)

In terms of water consumption per unit, Toyota's figure seems slightly better. 

When it comes to the use of renewable energies, Volkswagen is ahead of the game. They already achieved 41% renewable energy in their electricity consumption, while Toyota and GM achieved 12% and 22% respectively.

It seems that GAFA investments in renewable energy will continue to grow in the coming years.

Recently I had the opportunity to look at the ESG reports of GAFA companies (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon) and found some interesting facts by comparing numbers. 

First, I compared the percentage of renewable energy in their electricity consumption. Google and Apple achieved a rate of 100% renewable energy on their electricity consumption in 2019. Facebook and Amazon reached 86% and 42% respectively.

Since 2010, Google has invested "nearly $2.7 billion in large-scale renewable energy projects with an expected total combined capacity of approximately 4.6 GW". (The figure excludes Power Purchase Agreements for their operation.) 

I also looked at the time series data of Google's renewable electricity purchased and found that it grew rapidly over the 2013-2018 period.