In the first edition of the ranking published in 2022, 229 companies were selected. These were chosen from the 2021 Top 100 Corporate Flyers List, the Science-Based Targets (SBTi) database, and through a selection of European companies based upon business travel commitments or reporting. 

In 2022, we removed a limited number of small or low-flying companies, and added a number of large companies susceptible to flying a lot for business, based on number of employees, market capitalisation, and high business travel emissions in the CDP dataset. In 2023, we removed an extra small number of companies due to mergers or being part of another corporate group, and added several new companies with high business travel emissions in the CDP dataset. The ranking now includes 327 companies.

The ranking grades the 327 companies according to eleven indicators, relating to air travel emissions, reduction targets and reporting. Each indicator was broken down into varying levels of success, which gave a company a specific amount of points. 

For example, for the first indicator on commitment (i.e. does a company have a reduction commitment and does it specifically mention business air travel), a company was awarded 0 points for no target, 0.5 points for a broad emissions reduction target, 1 point for a business travel emissions reduction target, and 1.5 points for an air travel emissions reduction target. 

For a detailed overview of the eleven indicators and how many points were attributed for each level of success, please refer to Table 2 of the briefing.

We divided the range for total score, which goes from -1 to 14.5 points, in four equal parts corresponding to categories A, B, C or D. Companies are categorised based on their total score. 

An A grade corresponds to a score of 10.5 points or above. A company with the grade B has a total score ranging from 6.5 to 10. The grade C was given to all those companies with a score between 3 and 6. And the lowest grade, D, was for all companies scoring 2.5 points or less.

We pay particular attention to the top emitting companies which do not have targets to reduce their business travel emissions. These include, in order, Volkswagen, Accenture, KPMG International, Johnson & Johnson, SAP, Siemens, IBM, Microsoft, Alphabet, and Thyssenkrupp.

Points are deducted for not disclosing emissions and for being a major emitter (i.e. having 2019 air travel emissions above 280,000 tCO2). The minimum score (-1) represents a company which has no emissions reduction target, and either has no reporting or is a major emitter.

All companies were contacted before the publication of the ranking. Any company wishing to submit additional data is free to do so. We will then review the data and update the ranking if relevant. 

This year’s edition of the ranking was updated to include a few more companies (see question 1). We also updated the scoring for one indicator, and added another one.  For reporting specificity, if a company reported air travel emissions in some years and only business travel emissions in other years, 1.5 points were awarded for mixed AT / BT reporting, instead of the previous 2 points.  

A new indicator was added for emissions reduction, with an additional 0.5 points awarded to companies which kept their travel emissions in 2022 to under 50% of 2019 levels, meeting the campaign’s goal.  This goal has been established based upon the rigorous analysis in Transport & Environment’s Roadmap to climate neutral aviation showing that a 50% reduction in overall business travel is needed during this decade, in order to keep aviation within a 1.5°C-compatible pathway. T&E’s briefing How Europe can cut its oil demand by a third by 2030 also highlights the necessary contribution short-term reductions in business travel can make to energy security. Within a 50% overall reduction in business travel, it is fair that companies with higher levels of flying – and significant means – have a higher share of responsibility to significantly and quickly reduce their emissions. A handful of leading companies have already set targets compatible with the campaign goal, and 115 companies in the Travel Smart Emissions Tracker have maintained 50% or greater reductions based on 2022 data, demonstrating feasibility.

In addition, the 28 leading companies revealed in our survey [1] as having established policies to shift business flying to rail are highlighted with a badge, identifying them as a rail frontrunner or contender. 

[1] https://travelsmartcampaign.org/wp-content/uploads/Rail-first-for-business_2023-11-2.pdf

The grade attributed to companies may have changed compared to 2023. In this case, an arrow is there to indicate if the company has moved up or down a category. 

In 2022, companies’ air travel emissions remained 48% below 2019 levels. This was to some extent still due to travel restrictions from the COVID-19 pandemic, but we note that companies’ emissions have not rebounded in the same way as commercial aviation emissions did. A meaningful corporate travel target should take 2019 (or a previous year) as a baseline. We publish emissions data from 2019 as this is more representative of companies’ air travel when they have been free to fly. We then indicate whether companies have kept their 2022 emissions 50% or more below 2019 levels, meeting the campaign’s goal.  The latest overview of companies’ travel emissions reductions can be consulted in the Travel Smart Emissions Tracker webpage. 

Companies may find themselves attributed a “broad target” even though they include business travel in a target they have set. This is because targets that include business travel together with other sources of emissions may be able to be achieved without a meaningful reduction in business travel. For example, if a target is set on  employee commuting and business travel, it is well possible that the company achieves its target by reducing employee commuting emissions only. For business travel emissions to be meaningfully targeted, they must represent a substantial share of the scope on which a target is set. We considered a target to be business travel specific if travel emissions represent more than 75% of the emissions on which a target is set, and/or if the company clearly and explicitly detailed its plan to reduce business travel emissions as part of its broader target. 

On top of CO2, aircraft engines emit other gases – nitrous oxides, sulphur dioxide and water – and particulate matter (soot).  These are commonly referred to as non-CO2 emissions, and it is estimated that they account for two thirds of total climate warming from flying. Yet only very few companies reflect the total impact of business flights by accounting for non-CO2 effects. 

Companies should take into account the full climate warming impacts of business flying and reduce them. We found that 44 companies out of 327, up from 40 previously, are leading the way by reporting non-CO2 emissions associated with corporate flights. 

The financial, consulting and pharmaceutical sectors have the best score distribution with several companies ranked A and B. The most represented sector, manufacturing, has almost only C and D scores, similarly to retail and construction. The tech sector has a few B’s but no top marks.

Companies from the three most represented countries, the US, the UK and France, as well as the Netherlands, rank similarly although the UK has a higher share of A companies. This can be explained by the fact that the UK has a third of companies from the financial sector, which are performing well.  The UK and France both have legal frameworks requiring large businesses to report annually on their greenhouse gas emissions. Many US businesses annually report emissions to some degree, and while this is not yet a national legal obligation, California has now adopted legislation requiring large companies doing business in the state to annually report on their emissions.  In the Netherlands, starting in July 2024, businesses above 100 employees will have to report to the government their travel emissions and progress towards the mandated 50% decrease in domestic mobility emissions by 2030, from 2016 levels. Germany, on the other hand, does not have any A companies, and only a few B companies.  Its high share (45%) of poorly ranked manufacturing and energy companies partially explains it. A national policy would be welcome to fix this lack of transparency and commitment to reduce business travel emissions.