Forum Letter Reply - Inaugural GreenGov.SG Report Designed to be Accessible

Singapore, 17 January 2024 – I refer to the commentary “Government sustainability reports need to demonstrate greater clarity, better leadership” (BT, Dec 27, 2023).

The government publishes a wide range of reports to communicate Singapore’s efforts and progress in sustainability. These include the Biennial Update Report to the United Nations, which explains our national-level mitigation measures and tracks the progress of our Nationally Determined Contributions.

The GreenGov.SG report is our first report card detailing the whole-of-government’s efforts and progress in environmental sustainability. Singapore is among the very few countries that have published such reports.

Specifically, the GreenGov.SG report is a progress update of the public sector’s efforts in carbon abatement and resource efficiency at the organisational level. There are two main considerations which underpin the GreenGov.SG report.

First, we want to catalyse and drive environmental efforts across Singapore. Other than performance, we have included the public sector’s own strategies and case studies, which businesses, non-governmental organisations and community groups can reference for adoption or developing new ideas that suit their specific circumstances.

Second, with greater transparency, this report can spur ministry families to continuously strive to further minimise the environmental impact of their operations.

Apart from the GreenGov.SG report, we have mandated statutory boards to publish their own environmental sustainability disclosures from Financial Year 2024. As sustainability reporting is relatively new to the public sector, one key priority at this juncture is to ensure that agencies develop the necessary processes and systems to track and reduce their Scope 1 and 2 emissions, which are the greenhouse gas emissions produced directly and indirectly by an organisation’s operations and own use of energy, as well as electricity and water use. We also aim to start reporting on public agencies’ waste generation from this year.

We recognise that tracking Scope 3 emissions – which measures emissions arising from upstream and downstream value chains – play a part in the sustainability journey. However, this is a major undertaking, given the wide range of government activities that cut across many industry sectors with differing degrees of reporting capabilities. We are studying what would be an appropriate approach.

We welcome suggestions on how we can strengthen future GreenGov.SG reports. Members of the public who wish to share their feedback or partner the public service to trial new ideas in environmental sustainability may contact us at mse_feedback@mse.gov.sg.

Mr Lim Tuang Liang
Government Chief Sustainability Officer
MInistry of Sustainability and the Environment

Government sustainability reports need to demonstrate greater clarity, better leadership

Hopes were up that the new initiative for Singapore government agencies to publish annual sustainability reports would send clearer signals for how businesses can prioritise their decarbonisation efforts.

After all, Singapore has committed to peaking the country’s emissions earlier than 2030. And the government has said the public sector would lead efforts by peaking its emissions around 2025 and green its supply chain by introducing environmental sustainability criteria for tenders.

But the first disclosures by government agencies to trickle in have been underwhelming. Not only do they omit key emissions data, they contain little for companies to act upon.

Value-chain emissions and related procurement targets were notably missing as well, making it difficult for companies to gauge the demand for greener goods and services.

If the wish is for industries to rally more closely behind the national commitment – described as “significant” and requiring “substantial transformations across industry, economy and society” – government agencies need to speak more directly to companies.

Take, for example, the Land Transport Authority (LTA), which released its sustainability report on Dec 7.

The government-wide sustainability report released the subsequent week showed that the Ministry of Transport and its associated agencies – which include LTA – emitted 6.1 per cent more greenhouse gases in FY2022 from a year ago, to exceed 1.2 million tonnes.

The significant rise in emissions was attributed to the opening of new MRT stations and increased electric bus deployment, both areas under LTA’s remit. LTA owns all public bus and rail assets in Singapore. But the agency’s sustainability report did not address those.

LTA accounted only for emissions from running tunnels, traffic and street lighting, its office premises and corporate vehicles, and water usage within LTA offices. It ended up reporting that it exceeded its 2030 targets for energy use and water efficiency in 2022.

LTA’s office and vehicle emissions are, however, not as relevant to the public. It would be more impactful if the statutory board had spoken about the emissions attributable to its land transport policies, how they are projected to bend the emissions curve from now to 2030 and beyond, and whether it foresees rolling out more policies to flatten the curve.

If LTA’s own emissions numbers are incomplete, or rail and bus emissions are classified as indirect supply chain emissions, also known as Scope 3 emissions, LTA should address the exclusions where substantial numbers are involved.

This is especially since its Bus Contracting Model, where bus operators are paid fees to run bus routes, and New Rail Financing Framework, under which LTA takes over ownership of the country’s rail operating assets from SMRT Trains and SBS Transit, add to complications as to which party should account for which set of emissions.

Companies could perhaps turn to the portion where LTA elaborated on its efforts to green MRT infrastructure for a glimpse of the actionables, but that gave away little as well.

One portion of the report spoke of the possibility of increasing the adoption of alternative greener materials in the building of the Cross Island Line Stage 2 and 3 as an alternative to cutting conventional material use by 10 per cent, but no definitive target was ascribed to that.

Another portion spoke of mandating the use of low-carbon concrete in Stage 2 of the Cross Island Line and in upcoming footpath renewal contracts, but stopped short of making further commitments.

The weight of low-carbon and ordinary concrete used on 2021 and 2022’s project sites was disclosed in a table, but there does not appear to be information that any company can use. Context, such as the number and size of projects underway, is missing.

Despite stating interest to switch to low-carbon concrete, LTA reported a 40 per cent drop to the load of such concrete used on LTA project sites in 2022 versus a year ago. Without further context, this sends out conflicting signals.

LTA is used as an example here, but the pointers would apply to any government agency dealing with built infrastructure, such as the Housing and Development Board (HDB).

It is noteworthy that the government-wide sustainability report, dubbed the GreenGov.SG report, had left out Scope 3 emissions. The report includes only greenhouse gases produced directly by the government’s operations and by its power consumption.

That means, for instance, emissions linked to the construction of HDB flats – typically undertaken by external contractors – were not counted in the tally. Under this, public sector emissions were recorded at 3.7 million tonnes, just over 5 per cent of Singapore’s total emissions of 53.7 million tonnes produced in the 2021 calendar year.

As LTA’s case already demonstrates, HDB’s sustainability report would likewise be moot if it had only covered HDB’s office premises and omitted emissions at HDB construction sites – the area where it holds the greatest power to influence where emissions are involved.

The same influence test could be applied to the sustainability disclosures of agencies such as the Urban Redevelopment Authority and the Energy Market Authority.

They may not own the buildings they watch over, but they hold influence over how green private or commercial developments and power generation plants have to be. Ideally, their Scope 3 should cover the impact of their policies, which should assess if more stringent climate criteria are needed to meet the near and long-term country targets set.

Asked about the Scope 3 omissions, a spokesperson from the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment, which coordinates strategies for the GreenGov.SG movement, said flexibility is given to agencies in the reporting format it wishes to adopt to best suit their needs, in view that many statutory boards are new to this process.

“We will refine our framework over time and consider other requirements, as we strive to reduce our emissions and develop greater capability within the public service for tracking and reporting,” the spokesperson said.

Since standards for company sustainability reports to cater to the needs of investors and financial markets are now in place, perhaps attention ought to be shifted to how governments can better make their disclosures to be of greater use to companies.

Singapore already submits a biennial update report to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to track the progress of its national climate goals. Its latest submission was in November 2022, and the Republic is set to prepare to submit biennial transparency reports to the UNFCCC in 2024, in line with the Paris Agreement’s enhanced transparency framework.

The National Environment Agency, which compiles Singapore’s Greenhouse Gas inventory, is also already publishing the country’s greenhouse gas emissions annually.

However, driving the systems transformation needed to move Singapore’s emissions to net zero by 2050 would require far closer coordination with industries, and the annual sustainability reports required of government agencies from FY2024 could present that opportunity.

Ms Wong Pei Ting
Correspondent
The Business Times