Manni Group is the first organization in Italy to have been registered in the national program Carbon Footprint Italy (CFI), having successfully passed the verification by Bureau Veritas Italia S.p.a of its GHG inventory, in accordance to the new version of ISO 14064-1:2018.
“The 2019 GHG inventory, has followed the update of ISO 14064-1:2018”, highlights Nicolò Alberti – Sustainability Office Assistant of Manni Group– “with the expansion of the inventory scope to transport and use of products categories that involve around 270 suppliers from 30 countries around the world serving more than 80 markets”.
“The additional requirements to include the so-called Scope 3 emissions” – specifies Daniele Pernigotti – CFI Director – “is definitely the most important innovation of ISO 14064-1.2018. However, the expansion of the reporting boundaries does not allow for all the indirect emissions to have the same level of assurance on the data that it is possible to have for Scopes 1 and 2. Therefore, it becomes essential to adopt a mixed engagement approach for the verification, capable of combining the "traditional" verification with the Agreed Upon Procedures (AUP) engagement”.
The mixed engagement approach enabled by the new ISO 14064-3:2019 and accepted within the Programme Operator CFI, is another important innovation of the Manni Group's verification.
“The one of Manni has been for Bureau Veritas Italia S.pa. the first GHG inventory verification that uses the AUP approach”, underlines Luca Leonardi – Lead auditor Bureau Veritas. “After this experience” continues Leonardi, “it is certainly possible to express a positive opinion regarding the AUP approach that has become particularly useful to examine the entire spectrum of indirect GHG emissions. Emissions for which it is very difficult (and sometimes even impossible) to apply a materiality threshold, considering that these emissions are not always linked to information on which the organization has the entire control. During the past it was common to try to overcome this issue applying, unfairly, a "limited assurance engagement” to all the verification, with the aim of “mediate” between the reliability of Scope 1 and 2 data and those of Scope 3.
Alberti confirms that “the choice of using the AUP approach for the indirect GHG emissions enabled to verify a huge amount of data in a reasonable timeframe and effort, guaranteeing, in any case, the reliability of both the verification and the GHG inventory.”
It is not possible to formulate with a unique case a final assessment of the AUP approach. However, this first application has given positive results in terms of transparency and credibility of the verification, enabling to overcome one of the most widespread shortcomings encountered in the previous verifications of GHG inventories.
