A new industry guidance document aimed at improving how electronics companies account for Scope 3 Category 1 (Scope 3.1) emissions marks a significant step toward more consistent and effective supply chain decarbonization. A recent webinar hosted by the Global Electronics Association and the Responsible Business Alliance (RBA) addressed a persistent challenge: Despite the material impact of Scope 3.1 emissions, fewer than half of electronics companies currently report them.
“Scope 3.1 covers the greenhouse gas emissions arising upstream or in the supply chain of a company’s purchased goods and services,” said Emma Armstrong, executive director at Anthesis and webinar moderator. “It’s a very material emissions hotspot for the electronics industry, yet only 42% of electronics companies responding to CDP actually report on this important category.”
The new guidance, developed collaboratively with input from industry leaders including Cisco and TE Connectivity, seeks to close that gap by offering a structured, practical framework for companies at all stages of maturity.
A Complex Problem With Growing Urgency
Electronics manufacturing depends on deeply globalized and multi-tiered supply chains, making Scope 3.1 emissions particularly difficult to quantify. These emissions often originate from raw material extraction, processing, and manufacturing—activities typically outside a company’s direct control.
At the same time, regulatory pressures and customer expectations are intensifying. Companies are increasingly required not only to report emissions but also to demonstrate credible decarbonization strategies.
The new guidance responds to these pressures by emphasizing alignment and practicality. Rather than prescribing a one-size-fits-all solution, it outlines a “maturity journey” that allows companies to improve their accounting methods over time.
“The goal is to drive greater industry alignment and support more consistent approaches to Scope 3.1 accounting,” Armstrong said, adding that improved data quality ultimately enables better decision-making and emissions reduction efforts.
A Five-Level Maturity Framework
At the heart of the guidance is a five-level maturity model designed to meet companies where they are.
- Level 1: Orientation
Companies identify key purchase categories and emissions drivers across their operations. This foundational step helps organizations understand where their largest impacts lie. - Level 2: Secondary Data Methods
Many companies begin with spend-based or average-data approaches, such as environmentally extended input-output (EEIO) models or lifecycle inventory (LCI) databases. These methods provide a starting point for estimating emissions and identifying hotspots. - Level 3: Supplier-Specific Data
Organizations begin integrating primary data from suppliers, including product carbon footprints (PCFs) and facility-level emissions data. This stage introduces data quality scoring and allocation methodologies. - Level 4: Advanced Accounting Practices
Companies refine their approach by evaluating PCFs, accounting for recycled content, incorporating renewable energy data, and managing base year recalculations. - Level 5: Industry Collaboration
The final stage focuses on collective action—standardizing data, improving interoperability, and enabling suppliers to participate more effectively.
Importantly, the guidance emphasizes that companies do not need to achieve 100% supplier-specific data coverage to be effective.
“A blended approach strategically prioritizes investments in gathering and integrating supplier-specific data while continuing to leverage average or secondary-based methods,” Armstrong noted.
From ‘Art’ to Science: Cisco’s Journey
Cisco’s experience illustrates how companies can evolve through this maturity curve.
“Calculating Scope 3.1 emissions can feel a little bit more like an art than a science,” said Susie Danino, who leads supply chain decarbonization strategy at Cisco.
Cisco began in 2010 with a spend-based EEIO model, providing a broad estimate of emissions. Over time, the company layered in supplier-reported data, improving accuracy and enabling better tracking of supplier-led reductions.
Today, Cisco is advancing toward more granular primary data, including site-specific emissions and supplier-reported upstream Scope 3 data.
“The goal is to work with the data you have while simultaneously pursuing more and more primary data,” Danino said.
She emphasized that hybrid methodologies—combining multiple data types—will likely remain the norm.
“Ultimately, our accounting is going to continue to be some kind of hybrid methodology with whatever allows us to get to the best primary data available,” she said.
TE Connectivity: Scaling Through Supplier Engagement
For TE Connectivity, the challenge lies in its position midstream in the value chain, where visibility into raw materials is limited and supplier maturity varies widely.
“Scope 3.1 has definitely been one of our biggest challenges,” said Stella Stepanyan, sustainability manager at TE Connectivity.
The company initially relied on spend-based analysis but has since shifted toward primary data, focusing on high-impact materials such as resins and metals. Today, TE reports approximately 90% primary data coverage for resins and 85% for metals.
A key lesson: Data collection is fundamentally a supplier enablement challenge.
“The biggest turning point was to understand that data collection is not just a data collection exercise. It’s basically a supplier enablement problem,” Stepanyan said.
TE addressed this by simplifying data requests, focusing on critical inputs rather than demanding full PCFs, and embedding requirements into supplier contracts. Standardization and training have also been central to scaling efforts.
“Scalability comes from standardization,” she added.
Business Value Beyond Compliance
While regulatory compliance is a key driver, presenters stressed that Scope 3.1 accounting delivers broader business value.
Improved supplier engagement can uncover cost-saving opportunities, particularly in areas such as renewable energy and recycled materials. At the same time, better data enables companies to target emissions reductions more effectively.
“Anytime you’re able to engage closer with your suppliers, there is always inherently business value,” Danino said.
Stepanyan echoed this, noting that emissions reduction efforts often align with cost efficiencies and risk management, especially as regulations tighten globally.
Overcoming Practical Challenges
The webinar’s Q&A session highlighted several common hurdles:
- Limited supplier data: Many suppliers lack even basic Scope 1 and 2 inventories. Companies are encouraged to start with activity data and support suppliers in building capabilities.
- Resource constraints: Smaller sustainability teams must prioritize high-impact suppliers and leverage shared platforms like CDP or RBA tools.
- Data quality concerns: Not all supplier data is usable; companies need robust evaluation frameworks to ensure accuracy and completeness.
- Supplier engagement: Embedding requirements in contracts and involving procurement teams are critical for driving participation.
“A strong Scope 3 program is built on close partnership with suppliers,” Stepanyan said.
A Call for Industry Alignment
Ultimately, the guidance underscores the need for collective action. Without standardized data formats and shared expectations, both companies and suppliers face inefficiencies and reporting burdens.
Industry organizations, including the Global Electronics Association and RBA, are already advancing initiatives in data standardization and supplier enablement. These efforts will be essential to scaling primary data use across the sector.
“This guidance is designed for companies at every maturity level,” Armstrong said. “And hopefully will help the industry to get better alignment in approach to drive decarbonization.”
Moving Forward
As Scope 3 reporting becomes a central component of corporate sustainability strategies, the electronics industry faces both a challenge and an opportunity. The new guidance provides a roadmap, not just for compliance, but for meaningful emissions reduction.
The message from industry leaders is that perfection is not required to begin. “You don’t need perfect data to start with,” Stepanyan said. “But you do need a clear path toward getting primary data.”
With a structured approach, collaborative mindset, and sustained investment in supplier relationships, companies can move closer to that goal, and, in the process, accelerate decarbonization across the entire electronics value chain.
