Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Article
Data sources: ZENODO
addClaim

ANSWERING BUYER CARBON-DATA REQUESTS: A MINIMUM ACCOUNTING CONTOUR FOR SECOND-TIER EXPORTERS IN EMERGING ECONOMIES

Authors: Mukhammadiyaminova, Shakhzoda Sherzodovna;

ANSWERING BUYER CARBON-DATA REQUESTS: A MINIMUM ACCOUNTING CONTOUR FOR SECOND-TIER EXPORTERS IN EMERGING ECONOMIES

Abstract

Exporters in emerging economies increasingly receive greenhouse-gas data requests not from regulators but from their customers, who need supplier figures to complete their own value-chain inventories. Two instruments adopted in 2026 reshape this pressure in opposite directions. Directive (EU) 2026/470 introduced a value chain cap limiting the sustainability information that companies within the scope of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive may require from counterparties with 1,000 or fewer employees, and on 3 July 2026 the European Commission adopted the corresponding voluntary standard as a delegated act. Simultaneously, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol's Scope 3 revision, published as a Phase 1 progress update on 31 March 2026, proposes to make Scope 3 a required component of a conforming inventory, to require at least 95 per cent coverage, and to withdraw the method by which a purchase footprint is estimated from a diversified supplier's company-wide data. This article analyses what the combination means for a second-tier supplier located outside the European Union, using an Uzbek textile component manufacturer as an illustrative case. Three findings follow from a structured reading of the instruments. First, the cap limits volume but not specificity, while the accounting revision raises specificity: the supplier faces fewer but more demanding questions. Second, the cap binds the buyer rather than conferring a right on the supplier, and applies only to requests made for the purpose of reporting under the directive; requests arising from lending, due diligence, product compliance or ordinary procurement fall outside it, and these channels account for most requests reaching a non-EU supplier. Third, the data required to answer a compliant request is already held by such a firm in dispersed form. The article specifies a minimum accounting contour of eleven data items, each mapped to an existing internal record, and argues that the binding constraint is organisational rather than technical.

Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback