Understanding Scope 3 Emissions Under the GHG Protocol

For any manufacturer operating across Southeast Asia today, the conversation around carbon emissions has moved well beyond the boundaries of your own facilities. Your direct emissions from combustion and purchased electricity, classified as Scope 1 and Scope 2 under the GHG Protocol, are important. They are measurable, relatively controllable, and increasingly well-understood by your operations and finance teams.

But the largest share of your carbon emissions, by a considerable margin, lies elsewhere. It lies in the raw materials you purchase, the transport that moves them to your factory gates, the energy consumed when your products are used by customers, and the capital equipment that underpins your production lines. These are your scope 3 emissions, and they represent the frontier of carbon accounting for industrial enterprises.

The Greenhouse Gas Protocol, developed by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, defines scope 3 emissions as “all other indirect emissions occurring in the value chain.” This broad definition is deliberate. It captures the full climate impact of a company’s business activities, not just the emissions that occur within its own walls.

The GHG Protocol’s Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard, published in 2011 and updated with additional guidance since, provides the authoritative methodology for measuring these emissions. It organises scope 3 into 15 distinct categories, grouped into upstream activities (those that occur before your products leave your organisation) and downstream activities (those that occur after your products reach your customers).

For CFOs, CSOs, and Procurement Directors in manufacturing, semiconductors, steel, and petrochemicals, understanding scope 3 emissions is no longer an academic exercise. Regulators in Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand are progressively incorporating scope 3 requirements into mandatory reporting frameworks. Global customers are demanding supply chain emissions data as a condition of continued partnership. And financial institutions are factoring scope 3 performance into lending and investment decisions.

The challenge is real, but it is manageable. What scope 3 accounting requires is not perfection from day one, but a structured, methodical approach that starts with the most material categories and improves in granularity over time. In this guide, we will walk through what scope 3 emissions mean for manufacturers in Asia, how to measure them, and how to use that data to drive genuine reductions and maintain your competitive position.

The 15 Scope 3 Categories Explained for Manufacturing

The GHG Protocol’s 15 scope 3 categories provide a comprehensive framework for mapping the emissions in your value chain. Not every category will be equally relevant to your business, but understanding each one helps you identify where your largest opportunities and risks lie.

Upstream categories (1 to 8)

Category 1: Purchased goods and services. This is typically the single largest scope 3 category for manufacturers. It covers the extraction, production, and transportation of all goods and services you purchase. For a steel manufacturer, this includes iron ore, coal, and alloying elements. For a petrochemical company, it includes crude oil feedstocks and chemical intermediates. For semiconductor fabs, it covers silicon wafers, specialty gases, and photoresists. The emissions embedded in these inputs are determined by the production methods and energy sources of your suppliers.

Category 2: Capital goods. Capital goods are the long-lived assets your business purchases, such as manufacturing equipment, vehicles, and buildings. The emissions associated with producing and transporting a new blast furnace, a semiconductor lithography tool, or a petrochemical reactor are captured here. Because capital goods have long lifespans, these emissions are amortised over the useful life of the asset, which spreads the impact across multiple reporting periods.

Category 3: Fuel and energy-related activities. This category captures emissions that are not already counted in Scope 1 or Scope 2 but are associated with the production and distribution of the fuels and electricity you consume. It includes upstream emissions from fuel extraction, refining, and transport to your facility, as well as transmission and distribution losses in the electricity grid. For manufacturers in Indonesia and Malaysia, where grid emission factors can be relatively high, this category often warrants careful attention.

Category 4: Upstream transportation and distribution. This covers the transport of purchased goods, materials, and fuels between your suppliers and your operations, whether by road, rail, sea, or air. For manufacturers that import raw materials from multiple countries into production hubs in Singapore or Thailand, the logistics chain can be complex and carbon-intensive. Shipping routes, vessel types, and load factors all influence the emissions in this category.

Category 5: Waste generated in operations. The emissions from the treatment and disposal of waste produced by your operations, including landfill, incineration, recycling, and composting, fall into this category. Manufacturing processes often generate significant waste streams, from slag in steel production to chemical by-products in petrochemical refining. The way this waste is processed, and the emissions factors of the processing facilities, determine the magnitude of this category.

Category 6: Business travel. Emissions from employee travel for business purposes, including flights, rail journeys, and hired vehicles, are captured here. While this is rarely a material category for heavy industry, it is included in comprehensive scope 3 inventories and can be estimated relatively accurately from travel booking data.

Category 7: Employee commuting. The emissions from employees travelling between their homes and your facilities, whether by private vehicle, public transport, or other means, fall into this category. Commuting surveys, office location data, and regional transport emission factors are used to estimate these emissions.

Category 8: Upstream leased assets. If your company leases assets that are not included in your Scope 1 or Scope 2 inventory, the emissions from operating those leased assets are reported under this category. This is relevant for manufacturers that lease warehouse space, vehicle fleets, or office facilities.

Downstream categories (9 to 15)

Category 9: Downstream transportation and distribution. This covers the transport and distribution of your finished products between your operations and your customers. For manufacturers exporting from Southeast Asia to global markets, the choice between sea freight and air freight has a significant impact on this category.

Category 10: Processing of sold products. Emissions from intermediate processing of your sold products by downstream manufacturers are captured here. If you produce steel coils that are further processed by an automotive manufacturer, the emissions from their processing steps are allocated to this category.

Category 11: Use of sold products. This category is often the largest downstream category for manufacturers whose products consume energy during use. For a petrochemical company selling fuels or chemicals that are later combusted, this category can represent the majority of total scope 3 emissions. For manufacturers of energy-efficient equipment, this category may represent an opportunity to demonstrate the climate benefits of your products.

Category 12: End-of-life treatment of sold products. Emissions from the waste treatment and disposal of your products at the end of their useful life are captured here. This includes recycling, incineration, and landfill. For manufacturers investing in product recyclability and circular design, improvements in this category can be a meaningful part of your sustainability story.

Category 13: Downstream leased assets. Similar to category 8, this captures emissions from assets you lease to other entities that are not included in their Scope 1 or Scope 2 reporting.

Category 14: Franchises. Emissions from the operation of franchises are reported here. This category is less relevant for most industrial manufacturers but may apply to companies with franchised distribution or service networks.

Category 15: Investments. This category covers emissions from your investments, including equity investments, debt investments, and project finance. It is the basis for what the financial sector terms “financed emissions,” and it connects your company’s emissions performance to the reporting obligations of your banks and investors.

The practical task for any manufacturer beginning a scope 3 inventory is to conduct a screening assessment that estimates the emissions in each category using readily available data, such as procurement spend, production volumes, and industry-average emission factors. This screening identifies which categories are material to your business and should be prioritised for more detailed measurement.

Why Scope 3 Dominates Your Total Carbon Footprint

For most manufacturers, scope 3 emissions are not a marginal addition to the emissions inventory. They are the dominant component. Research from CDP and the Carbon Disclosure Project consistently shows that scope 3 emissions represent, on average, 70% to 90% of a manufacturing company’s total carbon emissions. In some capital-intensive sectors, the figure can exceed 95%.

Understanding why scope 3 dominates requires looking at the structure of modern manufacturing value chains. Consider a typical petrochemical complex in Thailand. The facility itself generates direct emissions from process heating, flaring, and on-site power generation (Scope 1), and indirect emissions from purchased electricity (Scope 2). These are substantial, and reducing them requires significant investment in efficiency, fuel switching, and renewable energy procurement.

However, the raw materials that feed the complex, particularly crude oil and natural gas derivatives, carry their own substantial embedded emissions from extraction, refining, and transport. The products leaving the complex, whether fuels, plastics, or chemical intermediates, will generate further emissions when they are processed, used, and eventually disposed of by customers around the world. When you add capital goods, logistics, and waste, the emissions occurring outside the facility gates dwarf those within.

For a semiconductor fabrication facility in Taiwan, the pattern is similar but the material categories shift. Purchased goods and services, including ultra-pure silicon, specialty chemicals, and rare earth elements, are the dominant upstream contributor. The use of sold products may be less significant, but capital goods, particularly the energy-intensive production of lithography and deposition equipment, are a substantial category.

For steel manufacturers in Indonesia or Malaysia, the upstream categories dominate. Iron ore mining, coal production, and the transport of these heavy materials to the steelmaking site are carbon-intensive activities. The use of sold products in construction and manufacturing adds further downstream emissions.

The implication is clear: if your organisation is serious about understanding and reducing its total climate impact, you cannot focus exclusively on Scope 1 and Scope 2. A strategy that addresses only direct and energy-related emissions while ignoring the value chain captures a small fraction of the total picture. This is precisely why regulators, investors, and customers are increasingly expecting scope 3 disclosure.

There is also a commercial dimension. As supply chain emissions become a procurement criterion for major global corporations, the quality of your scope 3 data directly affects your competitiveness. A manufacturer that can provide accurate, verified scope 3 emissions data to its customers has a tangible advantage over one that cannot. It demonstrates transparency, builds trust, and positions the company as a responsible supply chain partner.

Collecting Scope 3 Data from Suppliers in Southeast Asia

The single greatest practical challenge in scope 3 accounting is data collection, and the difficulty is amplified in Southeast Asia. The region’s manufacturing supply chains are complex, multi-tiered, and often span multiple countries. A single product may involve raw materials from Indonesia, processing in Vietnam, component assembly in Thailand, and final integration in Singapore or Malaysia.

Many suppliers in the region, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, lack the systems, expertise, and resources to measure and report their own emissions accurately. This creates a data gap that manufacturers must bridge thoughtfully and progressively.

A tiered approach to data quality

The GHG Protocol recognises that perfect primary data is not always available and provides a hierarchy of data quality that manufacturers can follow:

1. Primary data from suppliers. This is the most accurate approach. You ask your suppliers to provide actual emissions data, typically by completing a standardised questionnaire or through a digital platform. The data reflects their actual energy use, production processes, and emission factors. This produces the most accurate scope 3 calculations but requires active supplier engagement.

2. Secondary data from industry databases. When primary data is not available, you can use industry-average emission factors from recognised databases such as DEFRA, EPA, or regional life cycle databases. For example, if a supplier in Thailand cannot provide emissions data for a chemical input, you can apply a published emission factor per tonne of that chemical produced in the relevant region.

3. Spend-based estimates. As a starting point, you can estimate emissions by multiplying your procurement spend in each category by industry-average emission intensity factors. This is the least granular approach but it provides a reasonable initial estimate that can be refined over time.

The practical strategy for most manufacturers is to start with spend-based or secondary data estimates to establish a baseline, then progressively improve data quality by engaging the most significant suppliers to provide primary data. This is not a sign of weakness in your approach. It is recognised best practice, and both the GHG Protocol and the ISSB acknowledge the need for a phased approach.

Supplier engagement strategies that work in Asia

Effective supplier engagement in Southeast Asia requires sensitivity to the realities that smaller suppliers face. Many are operating on thin margins, lack dedicated sustainability staff, and may be responding to emissions data requests from multiple customers simultaneously.

Several strategies have proven effective:

– Provide clear, simple templates. Rather than asking suppliers to complete complex questionnaires, provide standardised spreadsheets or digital forms that ask for the essential data points: energy consumption by type, production volumes, and key process inputs. The simpler the request, the higher the response rate.

– Offer training and support. Many suppliers want to engage but do not know how. Offering webinars, guidance documents, or direct support helps build their capacity and improves the quality of the data they provide.

– Prioritise by materiality. Focus your primary data collection efforts on the suppliers that represent the largest share of your scope 3 emissions. A Pareto approach, targeting the 20% of suppliers responsible for 80% of your supply chain emissions, is far more effective than attempting to engage every supplier simultaneously.

– Use technology to automate the process. Digital supply chain emissions platforms can send data requests to suppliers, track response rates, validate incoming data, and apply emission factors automatically. This reduces the administrative burden on both your team and your suppliers.

NxMap, Evercomm’s carbon accounting platform, is designed to handle this complexity. It supports scope 3 accounting across all 15 GHG Protocol categories, ingests supplier data through integrated engagement workflows, applies region-specific emission factors for Southeast Asian operations, and maintains a complete audit trail from source data to reported figures. For manufacturers managing supply chains across Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia, this capability is essential for producing scope 3 inventories that are both comprehensive and verifiable.

The key message is that scope 3 data collection is a journey, not a destination. Starting with reasonable estimates and improving over time is far better than waiting for perfect data that may never arrive. Regulators and framework bodies understand this, and your reporting should reflect a transparent, honest assessment of where you are in that journey and how you plan to improve.

Using PCAF Standards for Financed Emissions Calculation

Among the 15 scope 3 categories, category 15, investments, occupies a unique position. It is the bridge between corporate emissions accounting and the financial sector’s growing responsibility for climate impact. The methodology most widely used to calculate financed emissions is the Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials, commonly known as PCAF.

What PCAF is and why it matters to manufacturers

PCAF is a global partnership of financial institutions that have collaborated to develop a standardised methodology for measuring and reporting the greenhouse gas emissions associated with loans, investments, and other financial activities. The PCAF Standard provides a consistent, transparent approach to calculating the carbon intensity of lending and investment portfolios.

For manufacturers, PCAF matters because it directly affects your relationship with your banks and investors. When a bank calculates its financed emissions using PCAF, the emissions intensity of your operations contributes to that calculation. If your bank has committed to reducing its financed emissions, which an increasing number of banks globally have done, then your emissions performance becomes a factor in the commercial relationship. Better emissions data and stronger reduction trajectories can translate into preferential financing terms, while poor or absent data may lead to tighter credit conditions.

The PCAF methodology works by attributing a share of a borrower’s emissions to the lender, proportionate to the lender’s share of the borrower’s outstanding debt. The calculation follows a clear hierarchy of data quality, from company-specific reported data (the most accurate) to industry-average and regional-average data (less accurate but acceptable when primary data is unavailable).

The data connection between manufacturers and financial institutions

The effectiveness of PCAF-based reporting depends on the quality of emissions data flowing from the real economy to the financial sector. If a manufacturer cannot provide accurate, verified emissions data, its bank must rely on estimates and proxies, which introduces uncertainty into the financed emissions calculation and may result in a conservative or inflated emissions attribution.

This creates a direct incentive for manufacturers to invest in robust carbon accounting. By providing high-quality, verified emissions data to your financial partners, you enable more accurate financed emissions reporting, which supports their own climate commitments and strengthens the lending relationship.

PATHMATCH, Evercomm’s scope 3 financed emissions platform, is specifically designed to facilitate this data connection. Built in partnership with CTBC Bank, one of Taiwan’s largest financial institutions, PATHMATCH provides a digital platform for supplier engagement and emissions data sharing between manufacturers and their banks. It automates the collection of scope 3 data from corporate borrowers, applies PCAF-aligned calculation methodologies, and generates the verified emissions reports that banks need for their financed emissions disclosures.

The results are tangible. PATHMATCH has been shown to save up to 1,500 hours per year per bank that would otherwise be spent on manual data collection, validation, and reporting. For manufacturers, the platform provides a streamlined channel for sharing verified emissions data with financial partners, reducing duplication and ensuring consistency between your own scope 3 reports and the financed emissions calculations of your lenders.

Building PCAF compliance into your scope 3 strategy

For manufacturers seeking to align with PCAF standards, several practical steps are important:

– Ensure that your own scope 1, scope 2, and material scope 3 emissions are calculated using GHG Protocol methodologies and are verified to a recognised standard such as ISO 14064. This provides the foundation data that PCAF calculations build upon.

– Work with your lenders to understand their PCAF reporting requirements and timelines. The earlier you can provide verified data, the smoother the reporting process will be for both parties.

– Invest in digital platforms that can generate PCAF-aligned reports directly from your emissions data. This eliminates manual conversion and reduces the risk of errors.

– Consider the strategic benefits of being a preferred data partner for your lenders. Financial institutions increasingly differentiate between borrowers who provide timely, accurate emissions data and those who do not.

Evercomm is PCAF compliant, and our platform supports PCAF-aligned reporting across all relevant scope 3 categories. This means that the data flowing through NxMap and PATHMATCH meets the standards expected by financial institutions globally, giving your business a credible, verified basis for its scope 3 and financed emissions disclosures.

Scope 3 Reduction Strategies for Petrochemical and Steel Operations

Measuring scope 3 emissions is a necessary first step, but the ultimate objective is reduction. For petrochemical and steel manufacturers, two of the most carbon-intensive sectors in Southeast Asia, scope 3 reduction presents both significant challenges and meaningful opportunities.

Strategies for petrochemical operations

The petrochemical sector’s scope 3 profile is distinctive. Category 1, purchased goods and services, is dominated by feedstock emissions, particularly from crude oil and natural gas. Category 11, use of sold products, is often the largest single category, as the fuels, plastics, and chemicals produced by petrochemical companies are widely used and often combusted by end customers.

Effective reduction strategies include:

– Feedstock decarbonisation. Engaging with upstream suppliers to source lower-carbon feedstocks, including bio-based or recycled feedstocks where available. The development of chemical recycling for plastics is creating new pathways to reduce the embedded carbon in petrochemical inputs.

– Product reformulation. Developing product formulations that require less energy in downstream processing or that enable customers to reduce their own emissions. For example, producing lighter polymer grades that reduce material usage in downstream manufacturing.

– Carbon capture integration. Investing in carbon capture, utilisation, and storage (CCUS) for process emissions that feed into both direct reporting and the embedded carbon of sold products.

– Supplier collaboration programmes. Working with key suppliers to set emissions reduction targets, share best practices, and co-invest in cleaner production technologies. The most effective programmes provide suppliers with technical support and clear incentives for improvement.

– Circular economy integration. Expanding the use of recycled feedstocks and designing products for recyclability. This reduces both upstream category 1 emissions (by displacing virgin feedstocks) and downstream category 12 emissions (by reducing end-of-life waste).

Strategies for steel operations

Steel manufacturing is one of the world’s most carbon-intensive industries, and its scope 3 profile reflects this reality. The dominant categories are typically purchased goods and services (iron ore, coal, and alloys), upstream transportation of heavy raw materials, capital goods (blast furnaces, rolling mills, and associated infrastructure), and use of sold products.

Reduction strategies for the steel sector include:

– Transition to lower-carbon production routes. Moving from traditional blast furnace-basic oxygen furnace (BF-BOF) production to electric arc furnace (EAF) production using scrap steel and renewable electricity. This can reduce emissions per tonne of steel by approximately 50% to 75%, though the transition requires significant capital investment.

– Green hydrogen adoption. Using green hydrogen as a reducing agent in direct reduced iron (DRI) production instead of coal-based reduction. This technology is advancing rapidly, with pilot projects in several Asian markets demonstrating its feasibility.

– Raw material sourcing optimisation. Engaging with iron ore and coal suppliers to source lower-carbon inputs. The emissions intensity of iron ore mining and coal production varies significantly by region and by producer, creating opportunities for meaningful reductions through supplier selection.

– Logistics efficiency. Optimising the transport of raw materials and finished products to reduce category 4 and category 9 emissions. This includes route optimisation, mode shifting from road to rail or sea where feasible, and collaborating with logistics providers that use lower-emission vessels and vehicles.

– Product efficiency and longevity. Designing steel products that enable downstream efficiency improvements, such as high-strength grades that reduce the total steel required in construction and automotive applications.

The role of data in driving reductions

Across both sectors, the common thread is that effective scope 3 reduction requires high-quality, actionable data. You cannot manage what you cannot measure, and you cannot prioritise reductions without knowing where your largest emissions lie.

NxMap supports this process by providing a detailed, category-by-category breakdown of scope 3 emissions, identifying hotspots, and tracking the impact of reduction initiatives over time. By integrating supplier data, regional emission factors, and production volume data into a single platform, NxMap enables manufacturers to make informed decisions about where to focus their reduction efforts and how to measure progress.

The most effective scope 3 reduction programmes combine top-down strategic planning with bottom-up supplier engagement. Set clear targets based on your material categories. Engage your most significant suppliers with specific requests and support. Track progress with verified data. And report transparently on both achievements and areas where further work is needed.

How to Report Scope 3 for CSRD and ISSB Compliance

The regulatory landscape for scope 3 reporting is evolving rapidly, and two frameworks are exerting particular influence on manufacturers in Asia: the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) standards.

CSRD and the European Sustainability Reporting Standards

The CSRD is the European Union’s comprehensive sustainability reporting framework, which significantly expands the scope and rigour of sustainability disclosure compared to its predecessor, the Non-Financial Reporting Directive. Under the CSRD, companies must report in accordance with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), which include specific requirements for climate-related disclosures.

ESRS E1, the climate standard, requires companies to disclose their scope 1, scope 2, and material scope 3 GHG emissions. The standard is clear: scope 3 is not optional. Companies must identify which of the 15 categories are material to their business, explain their calculation methodology, and disclose the data quality of their estimates.

For manufacturers in Southeast Asia, the CSRD may seem like a European regulation with limited direct applicability. However, the directive has extraterritorial reach. Non-EU companies that generate more than EUR 150 million in net revenue within the EU and have at least one EU subsidiary or branch will be required to report under the CSRD. This provision affects a significant number of Asian manufacturers that export to European markets.

Even for companies not directly in scope, the CSRD is shaping expectations. European customers, partners, and investors are increasingly expecting their Asian suppliers to meet the same standards of disclosure that the CSRD mandates for EU companies. The CSRD effectively raises the baseline for what constitutes acceptable sustainability reporting globally.

ISSB standards and their influence in Asia

The ISSB’s first two standards, IFRS S1 and IFRS S2, published in June 2023, are establishing themselves as the global baseline for sustainability and climate-related disclosures. IFRS S2 specifically requires disclosure of scope 1, scope 2, and scope 3 GHG emissions, along with climate-related risks, opportunities, and transition plans.

The influence of the ISSB in Asia is significant and growing. Singapore, through SGX and the Monetary Authority of Singapore, has committed to aligning local reporting requirements with ISSB standards. Taiwan’s Financial Supervisory Commission is progressively incorporating ISSB-aligned disclosure requirements into its sustainability reporting framework. Thailand and Malaysia are expected to follow similar trajectories.

For manufacturers, this means that scope 3 disclosure is moving from voluntary to mandatory across the region. The question is not whether you will need to report scope 3, but when, and how thoroughly.

Practical steps for compliance

Preparing for CSRD and ISSB-aligned scope 3 reporting requires a structured approach:

1. Conduct a materiality assessment. Map all 15 scope 3 categories and estimate their relative significance for your business. This assessment determines which categories you need to report in detail and which can be disclosed with less granularity.

2. Establish your data collection infrastructure. Implement systems and processes for collecting scope 3 data across your material categories. This includes supplier engagement programmes, digital data collection tools, and integration with your existing procurement and logistics systems.

3. Apply the GHG Protocol methodology. Both CSRD and ISSB reference the GHG Protocol as the methodology for scope 3 calculation. Ensure that your approach is consistent with the GHG Protocol’s requirements for boundary setting, emission factors, and data quality management.

4. Invest in verification. Third-party assurance of your scope 3 data significantly enhances its credibility. Work with an accredited verification body to obtain limited or reasonable assurance over your emissions inventory. Evercomm holds ISO 14064 certification and works with Bureau Veritas to provide verified emissions data, giving stakeholders confidence that your reported figures are reliable.

5. Document your methodology and data quality. Both CSRD and ISSB require transparency about how your scope 3 emissions are calculated, including the data sources used, the quality of those sources, and any assumptions or estimations applied. This documentation is essential for both compliance and credibility.

6. Build a platform that supports multiple frameworks. Rather than maintaining separate reporting processes for CSRD, ISSB, SGX, and other requirements, invest in a carbon accounting platform that can generate compliant reports from a single dataset. NxMap is built on this principle, supporting GHG Protocol, ISO 14064, ISSB, and CSRD-aligned reporting from a unified data foundation. This approach delivers up to 80% faster reporting compared to manual, framework-specific processes.

Starting now, not later

The most common mistake organisations make with scope 3 reporting is waiting. Waiting for perfect data, waiting for suppliers to be ready, waiting for the regulation to take full effect. In practice, the companies that fare best are those that begin their scope 3 journey early, build their data infrastructure progressively, and establish relationships with suppliers and financial partners around emissions transparency.

A phased approach, starting with spend-based estimates, moving to secondary data, and then engaging key suppliers for primary data, is entirely consistent with both CSRD and ISSB requirements. Both frameworks recognise that scope 3 data quality improves over time and require companies to disclose their approach to data quality management, not to achieve perfection immediately.

Evercomm is a certified B Corporation with a B Impact Score of 94.6. We are ISO 14064 certified, Bureau Veritas verified, and PCAF compliant. Our platform, including NxMap for scope 3 accounting and PATHMATCH for financed emissions and supplier engagement, is designed to help manufacturers across Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia navigate the complexities of scope 3 measurement, reduction, and reporting with confidence and credibility.

If you are ready to take the next step in your scope 3 journey, visit https://evercomm.io to learn how we can help you turn supply chain emissions from a reporting challenge into a strategic advantage.