Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

General

  • Footprint Intelligence is a modular sustainability-management platform for carbon accounting, reporting, materiality, product and supply-chain data, climate strategy and selected regulatory workflows. Teams connect source systems, import files or request data from contributors; the platform structures the information, applies configured methods, manages review and evidence, and produces dashboards and reports. AI can assist with extraction, mapping and drafting, but users approve the outputs.

  • AI significantly reduces the manual work involved in sustainability reporting while improving data quality and consistency.

    At Footprint Intelligence, AI is used to:

    • Extract emissions and ESG data from documents and spreadsheets

    • Classify data according to frameworks like CSRD, ESRS, and the GHG Protocol

    • Automatically structure sustainability datasets

    • Suggest missing data points or emission factors

    • Generate reporting outputs aligned with CSRD requirements

    This automation allows sustainability teams to move faster from data collection to decision-making, even when working with large datasets, complex supply chains, or multiple stakeholders.

  • Scope 1 covers direct emissions from sources an organization owns or controls. Scope 2 covers indirect emissions from purchased energy. Scope 3 covers other value-chain emissions in 15 upstream and downstream categories. Footprint Intelligence can calculate all three using activity, spend, supplier-specific or hybrid data, but completeness and accuracy still depend on the selected boundary, input quality, factor choice and review.

  • Administrators can model legal entities, business units, locations and group hierarchies, assign data ownership locally and consolidate approved results at group level. Permissions, reporting periods, currencies and organizational views can be configured so local teams contribute while group owners retain consistent methods and controls. Consolidation rules and eliminations should be agreed during implementation.

  • Footprint Intelligence combines carbon accounting, ESG reporting, and AI automation in a single platform designed for modern sustainability teams.

    Key differentiators include:

    • AI-assisted data extraction and classification

    • Built-in support for CSRD / ESRS compliance

    • Corporate and product carbon footprint calculations

    • Double Materiality Assessment workflows

    • Collaboration tools for internal teams and suppliers

    • Flexible data collection via integrations, uploads, or surveys

    Unlike traditional ESG software, Footprint Intelligence focuses on automation, usability, and real operational impact — helping companies move beyond reporting toward measurable decarbonization.

  • AI can extract data from documents, suggest mappings or emission factors, highlight gaps and draft text. Suggestions should display supporting context, sources or confidence where available and remain subject to user review. Customer data is not used to train public or third-party foundation models, and administrators can restrict AI features. Final methodology, disclosure and approval decisions remain human responsibilities.

  • Both. Footprint Intelligence is modular, so a mid-sized company can begin with one reporting or carbon-accounting workflow, while an enterprise group can manage multiple legal entities, locations, business units and countries in one governed workspace. The right configuration depends on reporting scope, data volume, integrations, assurance needs and the number of modules—not on buying a separate license for every user.

  • Sustainability teams usually own methodology and reporting; finance supports controls, KPIs and assurance; procurement collects supplier and product data; operations provide activity data; and IT governs identity, security and integrations. Role-based permissions, task assignment, reviews and approvals let each team contribute without giving every user administrative access.

  • A focused standard deployment can be configured in days to a few weeks. A complex group rollout with historical migration, custom methodology, SAP/ERP integration and several modules can take several months. The first usable result can often be delivered before the full rollout by agreeing a minimum data scope, importing representative data and validating one reporting period or entity first.

  • Yes. Modules can be introduced in phases and added later. Governed source data, organizational structures, user roles and evidence can then be reused across compatible workflows, reducing duplicate collection. The implementation design should identify shared data and avoid locking an early module into a boundary or hierarchy that will not support the later roadmap.

  • It can replace many spreadsheet-based collection, calculation, workflow and reporting tasks and may consolidate several point solutions. It does not eliminate the need for internal decisions, source-data owners, legal interpretation, assurance or specialist advice where those are required. The strongest business case is usually better control, reuse, traceability and collaboration—not a claim that every external expert becomes unnecessary.

  • Standard onboarding includes scoping, configuration, data mapping, training, user-acceptance support and go-live assistance. Ongoing product support and access to sustainability specialists are available; the exact hours, response commitments and advisory deliverables should be stated in the proposal and order form. Complex methodology design or custom integration work may require a separately scoped service package.

  • Footprint Intelligence uses an annual SaaS subscription based mainly on the selected modules and agreed implementation scope, rather than per-seat or consumption-credit pricing. The current commercial model includes unlimited users, entities and locations. Licensed third-party datasets, custom integrations, unusually complex migration or additional advisory work should be identified separately in the proposal.

  • One workspace can support corporate and product carbon footprints, LCA, CSRD/ESRS and VSME reporting, double materiality, ESG/GRI reporting, supplier data collection, targets and measures, employee and event emissions, climate-risk documentation, EU Taxonomy and selected regulatory agents. Availability depends on the modules purchased and the current release; each proposal should list included functions and integrations.

  • Standard roles include Global Administrator, Administrator, Editor, Data Contributor, Reviewer and Auditor. Access can be limited by module, entity, location, task or data area. Exact role names can be adapted, but least-privilege design and separation between preparation, review and approval should be documented during setup.

  • Owners can assign data requests and disclosures, set deadlines, send reminders, attach evidence, comment, review and approve. The platform records status and change history so managers can see gaps and bottlenecks. A workflow should define who prepares, reviews and signs off each item; software cannot substitute for that governance decision.

  • Start with the reporting boundary, organizational structure, prior reports, source-system owners, available activity/financial data, calculation methods, material evidence and user/identity requirements. A sustainability owner, IT/integration contact and representatives from finance, procurement or operations normally participate. A scoped data-readiness workshop can identify gaps before configuration begins.

  • Yes. Word, Excel, CSV, PDF, JSON and structured source-system data can be assessed for migration, and AI/OCR can assist with selected document extraction. Calculations and disclosures are mapped into the platform’s governed data model, then reconciled and approved. Unsupported custom logic should be documented and either configured, retained externally or redesigned.

  • Yes. Historical datasets, documents, reports, calculation structures and evidence can be mapped and imported from common files or source systems. Migration begins with an inventory and mapping exercise, followed by validation and reconciliation. Prior-year records should retain their original reporting period, source, methodology and factor version so later changes do not silently rewrite historical results.

  • German and English are fully supported, and French can be enabled; other user-interface or survey languages should be confirmed for the project. Multi-entity hierarchies and multiple currencies are supported, with conversion logic configured for the reporting use case. Publish a maintained language list rather than promising every language.

  • Many fields, workflows, hierarchies, dashboards, formulas, roles, templates and reports can be configured without custom code. A bespoke source-system connector, unusual methodology or specialist output may still require technical work. Discovery should distinguish configuration from development and document ownership, testing and maintenance for every customization.

  • A guided demonstration, proof of concept or test environment can be agreed for qualified evaluations. The scope should use representative data and predefined success criteria—for example one entity, one reporting period and one integration—so both sides can evaluate calculation traceability, usability and data fit. Availability and commercial terms depend on the evaluation plan.

Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD)

  • As of 23 September 2026, Directive (EU) 2026/470 (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2026/470/oj/eng) narrows mandatory CSRD scope principally to EU companies or parent undertakings with more than 1,000 employees and more than €450 million net annual turnover. For certain non-EU undertakings, the directive uses more than €450 million EU turnover plus a qualifying EU subsidiary or branch threshold of more than €200 million. The changes apply for financial years beginning on or after 1 January 2027, subject to national transposition and entity-specific rules. Listed SMEs are removed from mandatory CSRD scope. Obtain legal advice for a definitive scope assessment.

  • ESRS specify the disclosures for companies reporting under CSRD, including cross-cutting requirements and environmental, social and governance topics. Preparation normally includes confirming legal scope and reporting boundary, running a documented DMA, identifying applicable disclosures, assigning owners, collecting evidence and metrics, preparing the sustainability statement and supporting assurance. Footprint Intelligence can manage these steps, but does not decide materiality or legal compliance for the company.

  • Footprint Intelligence offers an end-to-end solution for CSRD compliance. It includes AI-powered data collection, ready-to-use ESRS templates, and automated report generation — all in one secure platform. You can manage data collection across teams, assign tasks, and ensure your reporting is structured for external assurance. It’s a faster, smarter way to meet CSRD obligations while integrating sustainability into your core business.

  • The EU Taxonomy is a classification system for environmentally sustainable economic activities. Companies subject to the relevant Article 8 disclosure rules report Taxonomy eligibility and alignment KPIs alongside their sustainability reporting. Footprint Intelligence can structure activity, criteria, evidence and Turnover/CapEx/OpEx data, but the applicable scope and alignment conclusions require legal, technical and financial review.

  • Footprint Intelligence maintains configurable requirement libraries and mappings and releases regulatory updates through its product process. Updates should identify the source, effective date, impacted data points and migration treatment while preserving prior-year versions. Customers remain responsible for legal interpretation; the site should publish release notes and a last-reviewed date rather than promise automatic compliance with every future change.

  • The DMA documents impacts, risks and opportunities, evaluates impact and financial materiality, and records thresholds and decisions. Material sustainability matters are then mapped to ESRS disclosure requirements and data points, subject to the ESRS rules for mandatory information and entity-specific disclosures. The platform supports that mapping; management approves the judgments and evidence.

  • Yes. A previous Word, PDF, Excel or structured report can be imported and its content mapped to current ESRS disclosures. AI can suggest semantic matches, but a user should confirm each reuse because an apparently similar paragraph may not meet the current disclosure requirement, boundary or reporting period. Gaps remain visible for assignment and completion.

  • Each disclosure or data point can have an owner, contributor, reviewer, deadline, comments, attachments and approval status. The audit trail records changes and versions so reporting teams can explain who supplied and approved information. Governance should define materiality approval, management sign-off and evidence-retention rules outside the software as well.

  • Yes. The platform supports group hierarchies, entity-level collection and consolidated views, while retaining the source entity and evidence. Reporting teams configure boundary, currency/unit conversions, local responsibilities and consolidation logic. Group reporting still requires decisions on subsidiaries, joint arrangements, value-chain data and alignment with the financial-reporting perimeter.

  • Relevant workflows support Word, PDF and spreadsheet exports, plus HTML/XHTML and XBRL/iXBRL outputs for digital reporting. Exact tagging and filing requirements depend on the applicable taxonomy, national filing mechanism and reporting year. Confirm the supported taxonomy/version and validation process before promising a submission-ready file.

  • The platform centralizes evidence, calculation lineage, roles, comments, approvals and version history and can give an external assurer controlled read-only access. It helps prepare evidence and respond to samples, but Footprint Intelligence does not provide the statutory limited-assurance opinion. The assurer independently determines procedures, evidence sufficiency and findings.

  • CSRD is the EU directive establishing sustainability-reporting obligations. ESRS are the reporting standards used by companies in scope. VSME is a voluntary standard aimed at non-listed SMEs and value-chain information requests. GRI is a global impact-reporting standards system. Footprint Intelligence can reuse governed data across these workflows, but a report under one is not automatically equivalent to another.

  • The customer remains responsible for legal scope, reporting boundary, materiality judgments, source-data accuracy, estimates, policies, disclosures and management approval. The external assurer remains responsible for the assurance engagement and opinion. Footprint Intelligence supplies workflow, calculation, evidence and reporting tools; it does not replace legal advice, governance or independent assurance.

Corporate Carbon Footprint

  • A Corporate Carbon Footprint is an inventory of an organization’s greenhouse-gas emissions across Scope 1, Scope 2 and relevant Scope 3 categories for a defined period and boundary. It establishes a baseline for disclosure, target setting and reduction planning. A reliable inventory documents exclusions, estimates, factors and methodology rather than presenting one total without context.

  • Calculating your CCF is key for meeting regulations like CSRD, creating decarbonization strategies, and building trust with stakeholders. It provides the baseline for ESG strategies and helps attract talent, customers, and investors who value transparency.

  • The easiest way to measure emissions is with a carbon accounting platform that automates data collection and calculations.

    Footprint Intelligence helps organizations:

    • Collect activity data across departments

    • Map activities to the correct Scope 1, 2, or 3 categories

    • Apply verified emission factors

    • Generate a complete corporate carbon footprint

    This allows companies to quickly establish a reliable emissions baseline, which is essential for CSRD reporting and decarbonization planning.

  • Footprint Intelligence supports multi-entity and group-level reporting, letting you group emissions by location, entity, or business unit. This makes it easy to track emissions at both a detailed and aggregated level.

  • Yes. The platform helps you model reduction strategies, estimate costs and savings, and prioritize actions aligned with frameworks like the Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi).

  • Yes. Approved CCF data can feed climate disclosures in CSRD/ESRS and other reporting frameworks when the data, boundary and method match the disclosure requirement. Reuse reduces duplicate collection, but it does not automatically make the report compliant or assured; reporting owners must address framework-specific narrative, targets, policies, assumptions and assurance evidence.

  • Yes. The CCF workflow supports all 15 upstream and downstream Scope 3 categories defined by the GHG Protocol Scope 3 Standard (https://ghgprotocol.org/corporate-value-chain-scope-3-standard), in addition to Scope 1 and Scope 2. Not every category is material to every company; teams document relevance, exclusions, methods and data quality for the selected organizational and operational boundary.

  • Footprint Intelligence supports spend-based, activity-based, supplier-specific and hybrid methods. Teams can choose the best available method by category, data maturity and reporting objective, then improve from estimates toward primary data over time. The method, activity data, unit, factor, allocation and source are retained for review; mixed methods should be disclosed rather than hidden in a single total.

  • Available sources include widely used public datasets such as DEFRA/DESNZ, EPA, IEA, AIB, EXIOBASE and Umweltbundesamt, plus licensed sources such as ecoinvent when contracted. Coverage and update schedules differ by provider. The platform stores source, geography, year and version; licensed datasets may require an additional agreement. Publish the exact current library and last-update dates instead of an inconsistent factor count.

  • Yes. Authorized users can add organization- or supplier-specific factors with unit, source, methodology, geography, validity period and supporting evidence. Custom factors should pass a review/approval workflow and remain versioned. Uncertainty or quality metadata can be recorded so users can distinguish a high-quality primary factor from an unsupported manual value.

  • Data records can be tagged by source and quality—for example measured activity, supplier-specific primary data, secondary database value, spend estimate or proxy. Dashboards can show coverage and gaps by category, entity or supplier. The taxonomy and scoring rules should be configured consistently, because the software cannot infer that a value is “primary” merely because a supplier submitted it.

  • Yes. Calculation records retain the activity data, units, conversion, emission factor and factor version, method and relevant approvals so prior results can be reproduced. Updating a factor library should create a new calculation or reporting version rather than silently altering an approved prior-year inventory.

  • Location-based Scope 2 applies grid-average factors for the relevant geography. Market-based Scope 2 uses qualifying contractual instruments and supplier-specific information, with residual-mix or other fallback factors as required by the selected method. Footprint Intelligence supports both views; users remain responsible for the quality criteria and evidence for tariffs, certificates or power-purchase arrangements.

  • Organizational boundaries and consolidation approaches are configured by entity, ownership/control and reporting period. Acquisitions, divestments and structural or methodology changes can be reflected through versioned hierarchies and controlled recalculations. The company should adopt a documented base-year recalculation policy and significance threshold consistent with its chosen GHG-accounting standard.

  • Authorized auditors can receive read-only access to calculation details, factors, source documents, comments, approvals and change history, or the data can be exported. This supports assurance preparation, but it does not constitute independent assurance. The organization and its assurer decide sampling, evidence sufficiency and any adjustments.

  • A focused first inventory can be configured in weeks, while a complex multi-entity Scope 3 program may take several months and improve over multiple cycles. Prepare energy and fuel records, refrigerants, purchased goods/services or spend, logistics, travel, waste, employee and sold-product data relevant to the boundary, plus entity/location structures and prior methods. Data readiness usually determines timing more than calculation speed.

LCA & Product Footprint

  • A Product Carbon Footprint quantifies greenhouse-gas emissions associated with a product for a defined functional or declared unit and system boundary. Depending on the goal, it may cover cradle-to-gate, cradle-to-customer or the full life cycle. A PCF supports hotspot analysis, product design, customer requests and Scope 3 data, but CSRD does not generally require a separate PCF for every product.

  • The platform combines product/activity data with selected life-cycle datasets and configured rules, then calculates emissions by component, process and life-cycle stage. Hotspots can be compared across materials, suppliers, designs and scenarios. Suggested reductions are modelled estimates based on assumptions; engineering, procurement and product owners decide feasibility and implementation.

  • Typical inputs include product composition and quantities, manufacturing energy and process emissions, scrap and allocation data, transport, packaging, use-phase assumptions and end-of-life treatment for the chosen boundary. Supplier-specific information improves quality, but approved secondary data can fill documented gaps. The necessary inputs depend on the functional unit and study goal.

  • Footprint Intelligence uses AI-assisted data entry, lifecycle databases, and real usage data to calculate product emissions. The platform then recommends decarbonization actions based on cost, feasibility, and potential impact.

  • An approved PCF or component footprint can support relevant Scope 3 calculations when its unit, period, boundary and purchasing/sales quantity match the corporate method. The integration should prevent double counting and disclose whether the value is cradle-to-gate or includes downstream stages. Product data may also support material ESRS climate or circularity disclosures; it is not automatically a CSRD requirement.

  • An LCA evaluates environmental inputs, outputs and impacts across a defined product or service life cycle. Its four main phases are goal and scope definition, life-cycle inventory, impact assessment and interpretation. The boundary may be partial or full depending on the purpose; “life cycle” should not be used to imply that every study automatically covers cradle to grave.

  • A PCF focuses on one impact category: climate change, expressed as CO₂-equivalents. An LCA can assess multiple environmental impact categories across a defined product system. Both use life-cycle inventory data, boundaries and allocation rules, but an LCA requires broader impact-assessment choices and interpretation. The goal and intended audience should determine which study is appropriate.

  • The PCF workflow supports quantification structured around ISO 14067 (https://www.iso.org/standard/71206.html) and life-cycle principles in ISO 14040/14044. Footprint Intelligence can structure and export product-footprint data, but current conformance with a specific PACT version or Catena-X service must be verified for the proposed use case. Do not claim certified interoperability without current test or certification evidence.

  • Yes. Bills of materials, recipes, component lists and process data can be imported from ERP or PLM systems through APIs, middleware or scheduled files, and from Excel/CSV templates. Implementation maps product, supplier, unit and process identifiers and validates duplicates and conversions before calculation.

  • Each study records its goal, functional or declared unit, boundary, life-cycle stages, allocation choices and other methodological assumptions. Product variants can inherit approved components or processes while retaining variant-specific data. Any change to boundary or allocation should create a new controlled version so results remain comparable and reproducible.

  • Missing values can be filled with approved secondary datasets, spend/activity estimates or documented proxies. Supplier-specific primary data, secondary data and assumptions are tagged separately, and quality or uncertainty metadata can be shown. Teams can then prioritize high-impact gaps without presenting estimates as measured supplier results.

  • Yes. Supplier PCFs and factors can be uploaded with boundary, unit, method, geography, period and evidence, then reviewed and approved before reuse. A supplier total should not be combined blindly with component data: users must check boundary compatibility, biogenic treatment, allocation and double counting.

  • The platform is designed to reuse components, processes, factors and rules across product portfolios, which makes portfolio-scale calculation possible. Bulk imports and APIs reduce manual work, while each result retains product, data, method and factor versions. Performance and volume limits should be tested with a representative portfolio during evaluation.

  • Teams can share controlled reports and structured exports containing the result, declared unit, boundary, method, factor sources, data-quality information and supporting evidence as appropriate. Exact network formats and access controls depend on the receiving system and license terms. A software-generated report is not an independent verification statement.

  • The workflow supports the stages described in ISO 14040 (https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html) and the requirements/guidance in ISO 14044 (https://www.iso.org/standard/38498.html): goal and scope, inventory, impact assessment, interpretation, documentation and review. Software supports the process but is not itself “ISO-certified,” and study conformance depends on user choices, documentation and any required critical review.

  • Available impact methods and categories depend on the configured LCA engine and licensed datasets. Typical categories may include climate change, energy/resources, water-related impacts, acidification, eutrophication and others. Publish a maintained matrix of method versions, characterization models and databases; do not promise every impact category or commercial database by default.

  • Each assessment records the included processes and life-cycle stages, functional unit, allocation method, cut-off rules, data sources and end-of-life assumptions. These choices are versioned with the result and included in the study documentation. Reviewers can trace how an assumption changes the outcome instead of seeing only a final score.

  • Yes. BOMs, components, supplier datasets and process models can be imported and stored as reusable building blocks, subject to permissions and licensing. Reuse reduces work across product variants, but teams should control geography, technology, validity period and allocation so an old or inappropriate process is not propagated.

  • Records can distinguish primary, secondary and proxy data and include source, age, geography, technology and completeness information. Data-quality or uncertainty indicators highlight material gaps for improvement. The platform should explain the scoring method and avoid compressing uncertainty into an unexplained green/amber/red label.

  • Yes. Teams can compare alternative materials, suppliers, energy mixes, transport routes, product designs and end-of-life scenarios using consistent functional units and boundaries. Results are scenario estimates, not forecasts; decision-makers should review technical feasibility, cost, performance and potential burden shifting across impact categories.

  • Footprint Intelligence can prepare LCA data and report content used in an Environmental Product Declaration. A valid EPD still follows the applicable product-category rules and program instructions and normally requires independent verification and publication by an EPD program operator. The software does not replace those external steps.

Double Materiality Analysis

  • Double Materiality means assessing both how sustainability issues impact your business (financial materiality) and how your business impacts people and the planet (impact materiality) — a requirement under CSRD.

  • Double materiality determines which sustainability matters require attention and disclosure under ESRS and connects external impacts with financially relevant risks and opportunities. It is not only a reporting exercise: its evidence can inform strategy, risk management, controls and targets. A defensible process is more important than the visual materiality matrix alone.

  • A Double Materiality Assessment typically involves:

    1. Identifying relevant ESG topics

    2. Engaging stakeholders to gather input

    3. Evaluating both financial and environmental impacts

    4. Prioritizing material topics in a materiality matrix

    Footprint Intelligence simplifies this process by providing structured workflows, stakeholder survey tools, and automated analysis, enabling organizations to complete their assessment faster while meeting CSRD and ESRS expectations.

  • The platform guides you through a clear, 3-step process: stakeholder analysis, identification of key matters, and creation of a materiality matrix. Outputs are CSRD-compliant and audit-ready.

  • Surveys, interview notes, source documents and consultation outcomes can be linked to the relevant IRO or topic, with contributor, date and review status. ESRS requires the organization to consider affected stakeholders, but it does not mandate a direct survey for every topic. The team should choose proportionate engagement and record how stakeholder evidence influenced decisions.

  • Teams build a long list from the business model, activities, geographies, value chain, prior assessments, incidents, research and stakeholder evidence. They then document affected stakeholders, time horizon, scale/scope/remediability or likelihood/magnitude, and links to ESRS topics. The platform structures and scores this work; the organization approves the IROs and judgments.

  • Yes. Scales, thresholds, time horizons and stakeholder groupings can be configured to the organization’s documented methodology. Configuration should remain consistent across entities and periods unless a controlled change is approved. The report should explain the method rather than present a matrix without definitions.

  • Yes. A group can maintain a common methodology and consolidated assessment while capturing entity-, country- or business-unit-specific IROs and evidence. Local differences can roll up without being hidden. Group management still decides when a local issue is material at group level and how entity-level reporting requirements are addressed.

  • The platform can retain score inputs, comments, evidence, threshold decisions, reviewers, approvals and version history. This supports assurance preparation and management review. It does not make the assessment automatically “audit-ready” or compliant; an assurer evaluates the methodology, process and evidence independently.

  • Approved material sustainability matters are linked to the relevant topical ESRS and disclosure requirements, while cross-cutting and other mandatory information remains visible. The workflow then assigns applicable data points and narrative disclosures. Users confirm entity-specific disclosures and any phase-ins, omissions or non-material conclusions.

  • Review the DMA each reporting cycle and update it when there is a material change in strategy, operations, value chain, geography, regulation, evidence or stakeholder impacts. Footprint Intelligence can retain versions and compare IROs, scores and decisions across periods. A full restart is not always needed, but unchanged conclusions should still be reconsidered and documented.

Decarbonization & Impact

  • AI can help organize large datasets, identify hotspots, suggest mappings or candidate actions and summarize scenario results. It should not choose the company’s strategy autonomously. Users review the source data, assumptions, confidence and business constraints before accepting a recommendation.

  • Footprint Intelligence enables organizations to model potential decarbonization initiatives and estimate their expected impact.

    The platform helps evaluate:

    • Projected emission reductions

    • Implementation costs

    • Operational feasibility

    • Alignment with climate targets and ESG strategies

    This makes it easier to prioritize the initiatives that deliver the greatest environmental and business value.

  • It can compare measures by expected emissions impact, cost, savings, payback, feasibility and other configured criteria. “ROI” depends on the organization’s financial assumptions and may not capture strategic, regulatory or risk value, so decision-makers can adjust weightings rather than relying on a universal rank.

  • The platform can model reduction pathways, set base-year and interim targets, allocate them across entities or emissions sources and compare actual performance with the path. Teams can configure criteria aligned with the applicable SBTi standard. Only SBTi Services or another recognized validation body can validate a submitted target; Footprint Intelligence does not guarantee validation.

  • Users enter or configure implementation timing, affected activity, reduction potential, investment, operating cost/savings, lifetime, dependencies and feasibility. The platform calculates scenario metrics and can prioritize measures. Results are estimates based on the supplied assumptions; finance and operational owners should validate costs, benefits and double-counting before investment approval.

  • The library contains configurable reduction ideas across common sources such as energy, buildings, mobility, procurement, logistics and operations. Each measure should show its description, applicable context and editable assumptions; customer-specific costs and effects must be entered or validated locally. Publish “500+” only with an internal definition, review date and source-governance process.

  • Yes. Organizations can create custom initiatives, assign owners and entities, set milestones and KPIs, attach evidence and record CapEx, OpEx, savings and expected reductions. Approval and progress workflows help connect the climate plan to operational delivery.

  • Yes. Scenarios can be compared at group, entity, location or business-unit level using consistent assumptions, with drill-down into individual measures. Users should separate structural business changes from measure-driven reductions and avoid summing overlapping initiatives.

  • Scenario results can be recalculated when baselines, growth assumptions, factors, timing or measure performance change. Controlled versions preserve the assumptions behind prior decisions. A recalculation should be approved and explained rather than silently replacing the plan used by management.

  • Yes. Measures, owners, milestones, costs, savings, emission impacts and scenario charts can be exported into management and investment materials using document or spreadsheet formats. The export supports decision-making but does not replace the organization’s financial appraisal, budgeting or board approval.

SME & VSME

  • VSME is a voluntary sustainability-reporting standard for non-listed SMEs, reflected in Commission Recommendation (EU) 2025/1710 (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reco/2025/1710/oj/eng). It helps SMEs respond consistently to customers, banks and investors without applying the full ESRS. It is not a legal obligation or certification, and using it does not by itself make a company CSRD-compliant.

  • Most SMEs are not legally required to report under CSRD unless they are listed on a regulated market. However, using VSME is strongly recommended for SMEs that want to improve transparency, meet supply chain expectations, or access financing that favors ESG-aligned businesses. Footprint Intelligence supports both VSME and CSRD-aligned reporting workflows.

  • Small businesses can start by mapping their environmental and social impacts, gathering basic data on Scope 1–3 emissions, and adopting a lightweight standard like VSME. Footprint Intelligence provides ready-made templates, AI assistance, and guided workflows tailored to SMEs — so you can get started without needing in-house ESG experts.

  • Platforms like Footprint Intelligence streamline VSME reporting by offering pre-built data collection templates, AI support for data processing, and automated report creation. This makes it possible for smaller teams to generate credible reports without heavy manual work.

  • Yes — Footprint Intelligence is designed for flexibility. The platform adapts to smaller businesses by offering affordable, easy-to-use tools for ESG reporting, carbon footprint calculations, and stakeholder engagement — all without needing extensive ESG expertise.

  • A specialist is not required for routine data entry or workflow operation, because templates, guidance and expert support are available. Management still needs to understand and approve the company’s boundaries, claims, estimates and policies. Complex carbon methods, legal interpretations or external assurance may require qualified support.

  • VSME gives an SME a consistent, proportionate dataset for customer, bank, investor and procurement requests. It can reduce repeated questionnaires, expose data gaps and establish a baseline for improvement. The value is better transparency and reuse—not a guarantee of financing, customer selection or regulatory compliance.

  • The Basic Module contains disclosures B1–B11 and is the entry point. The Comprehensive Module adds information commonly requested by lenders, investors and larger customers; the Basic Module is a prerequisite. Footprint Intelligence guides the selected disclosures, assigns data owners and reuses approved carbon, workforce and policy data across both modules.

  • Yes. Approved VSME data and evidence can form a reusable source for customer, lender, investor and supply-chain information requests. The platform can map common questions to governed values and documents. Each recipient may still request additional definitions, periods or evidence, so the response should show the source and not imply that VSME guarantees acceptance.

  • Prepare company profile and workforce data, energy and greenhouse-gas information, key environmental impacts, policies, targets and actions relevant to the selected module, plus source documents and responsible owners. Start with what is available, identify estimates and gaps, and avoid collecting non-material detail merely to fill a template.

  • A company with a clear boundary and accessible data may complete an initial Basic Module in a few weeks; the Comprehensive Module or a first carbon inventory can take longer. Timing depends on data readiness, entities, evidence and review—not only platform setup. A short readiness assessment should define scope and owners before a public timetable is promised.

  • Yes. Approved carbon, energy, workforce and policy data can be reused in applicable VSME disclosures, reducing duplicate entry. Reuse remains controlled by reporting period, boundary, units and approvals so a value is not copied into a disclosure where its definition differs.

  • Much of the organizational data, emissions information, policies, evidence and ownership structure can be reused. However, ESRS requires a double materiality assessment, more detailed disclosures, governance and assurance preparation, so an upgrade is not a one-click conversion. Footprint Intelligence can map reusable content and identify the remaining gaps.

  • Users can attach supporting documents, assign preparers and reviewers, comment, approve and retain change history. VSME results can be exported in document and spreadsheet formats such as Word, PDF and Excel, subject to the configured template. The report should identify estimates and omitted information transparently.

Employee Footprint

  • Business travel is generally reported in Scope 3 Category 6, while employee commuting is Category 7 under the GHG Protocol. Some methods also include home-working energy in Category 7. The selected method should state which sources are included, how survey data is extrapolated and how overlap with company-paid travel or office energy is avoided.

  • These sources can be material, support a more complete Scope 3 inventory and reveal cost and reduction opportunities such as travel policy, rail substitution, remote-work design and commuting programs. Track them when relevant to the inventory and decision-making, not because CSRD automatically requires every company to report every travel source.

  • Employees can report commuting and business travel data via Footprint’s in-app surveys. The platform calculates the resulting Scope 3 emissions automatically.

  • Yes. Footprint Intelligence includes tools for employees to submit data securely — boosting accuracy while protecting privacy.

  • It improves Scope 3 reporting, engages employees in sustainability, and helps companies identify ways to cut emissions and costs.

  • The platform can use anonymous or pseudonymous surveys and report aggregated results, but GDPR compliance also depends on the employer’s purpose, legal basis, transparency, minimization, retention and access controls. Avoid collecting names or precise home addresses unless necessary. The customer, usually acting as controller, should approve the privacy notice and assess whether a DPIA is needed.

  • Response rates and sample coverage are shown, and missing responses can be extrapolated using documented employee-population and location/working-pattern assumptions. The output should disclose the response rate, method and uncertainty. A low-response survey should not be labelled as measured data for the whole workforce.

  • Yes. Results can be aggregated by office, region or other approved grouping while suppressing or combining small groups to reduce re-identification risk. Access controls should prevent managers from drilling into individual answers. The organization defines minimum group sizes and privacy rules.

  • Approved commuting and home-working estimates can feed the relevant Category 7 calculation for the same reporting period and employee population. Business-travel data feeds Category 6 separately. The CCF retains survey method, extrapolation, factors and assumptions so reviewers can trace the total.

  • Surveys can be localized and repeated by reporting period. To preserve comparability, retain core questions, definitions and calculation rules and document any changes to working-pattern categories, factors or sample coverage. Available languages should be confirmed for the project and translations reviewed.

Guest Footprint

  • A guest or event footprint estimates emissions associated with an event or visitor activity for a defined boundary, often including attendee travel, accommodation, venue energy, catering, materials and waste. It helps organizers identify hotspots and compare event choices. Inclusion in a corporate inventory depends on the event, control, value-chain category, materiality and selected methodology.

  • Guest-related travel, accommodation, and catering can create significant indirect emissions that CSRD and ESG frameworks increasingly require companies to report.

  • Footprint provides tools to collect attendee travel and stay data and generate guest-level or event-level carbon estimates.

  • Yes. Footprint Intelligence includes app features that let guests report travel data and engage in sustainability initiatives.

  • The platform gathers data on travel modes, accommodations, and other guest activities, converting it into carbon equivalents for comprehensive reporting.

  • Yes — Footprint Intelligence integrates guest emissions directly into your corporate reporting to ensure full Scope 3 coverage.

  • The assessment can combine attendee and staff travel, accommodation, venue energy, catering, freight, temporary materials, merchandise and waste where data is available and within the boundary. Organizers define whether construction, broadcast/digital participation or sponsor activity is included and document exclusions.

  • Attendees can provide requested travel or stay information through a low-friction survey or app workflow without buying a platform subscription. The exact login and consent experience should be confirmed for the event configuration. Collect only necessary data and explain how answers will be aggregated and retained.

  • The platform can extrapolate from the response sample using attendance, origin, travel mode and other documented assumptions or approved benchmark data. Reports show the response rate, estimated share and method. Estimates should remain distinguishable from measured responses.

  • Yes, if the functional basis and boundary are consistent—for example total event emissions plus per attendee or attendee-day. The comparison should account for attendance, duration, geography, hybrid participation and scope changes. Versioned factors and methods preserve year-over-year interpretation.

  • Organizers can share a report with boundary, methodology, totals, intensity metrics, hotspots, response rate, estimates, factors and supporting evidence, subject to privacy and permissions. A third-party verification statement must come from an independent verifier, not from the software.

Supply Chain Management

  • For many organizations, the majority of environmental impact occurs in their supply chain, particularly within Scope 3 emissions.

    Tracking supplier sustainability helps companies improve transparency, reduce risks, and meet ESG reporting requirements.

  • Companies typically collect supplier sustainability data through surveys, reporting templates, or dedicated platforms.

    Footprint Intelligence allows suppliers to submit sustainability and emissions data directly through collaborative workflows, making data collection more efficient and transparent.

  • Footprint Intelligence combines supplier requests, evidence, quality controls, dashboards and links to CCF, PCF and reporting workflows. It helps procurement and sustainability teams see response status, data gaps and improvement opportunities. Supplier engagement and corrective action still require commercial relationships and internal governance outside the software.

  • Suppliers can be invited to contribute data and evidence through controlled workflows without purchasing the buyer’s full platform subscription. The exact external-contributor experience, authentication and any program-volume limits should be confirmed in the contract. Suppliers see only the requests and information permitted for their role.

  • Yes. Procurement teams can create data requests, assign supplier contacts, set deadlines, monitor completion and send reminders in bulk. German and English are fully supported, and selected additional survey languages can be enabled. The available language set and translation-review process should be confirmed for the program.

  • The workflow can collect supplier corporate emissions, allocation information, product or component footprints, activity data, energy, materials, transport, waste and supporting policies/evidence for relevant upstream or downstream Scope 3 categories. The request should match the calculation method and avoid asking every supplier for data that will not be used.

  • Supplier-provided primary data, externally verified data, database estimates, spend factors and other proxies are labelled by source and method. Quality criteria can consider boundary, period, specificity, evidence and assurance. Dashboards show coverage and priority gaps, while the published method should explain how the quality score is calculated.

  • Yes. Suppliers can submit structured values and attach product footprints, certificates and supporting files. Role-based permissions and tenant controls restrict who can view the material. Highly confidential data should be scoped carefully: buyers may need only an approved result and method metadata rather than a supplier’s full recipe or process model.

  • Configurable dashboards can compare suppliers using normalized emissions, primary-data coverage, evidence quality, risk indicators and agreed improvement actions. Comparisons should control for product, volume, geography and boundary; a lower absolute footprint is not automatically better if suppliers are not comparable.

  • Approved supplier records can be mapped into corporate Scope 3 calculations, product footprints and relevant product/regulatory datasets, reducing duplicate requests. Each workflow still checks its own boundary, unit and evidence needs. EUDR and PPWR-specific functions should only be claimed where the current product release supports them.

  • Yes. Supplier master, purchase-order, spend, quantity and product identifiers can be imported through APIs, middleware or scheduled files and mapped to requests and calculations. Data ownership, frequency, identifier matching, error handling and write-back requirements are defined during integration discovery.

  • Teams can send reminders, escalate priority suppliers and use approved secondary factors, spend/activity estimates or proxies for unresolved gaps. The method and data-quality level remain visible, so the estimate is not mistaken for supplier-specific primary data. Outreach can then focus on the suppliers and categories that most affect the result.

ESG Ratings

  • ESG assessments differ: MSCI and Sustainalytics produce investor-oriented ratings, EcoVadis assesses business sustainability practices, and CDP scores environmental disclosure. Companies improve readiness by understanding the specific methodology, strengthening governance and performance, publishing accurate evidence and addressing material risks. One generic checklist cannot guarantee results across all providers.

  • ESG assessments differ: MSCI and Sustainalytics produce investor-oriented ratings, EcoVadis assesses business sustainability practices, and CDP scores environmental disclosure. Companies improve readiness by understanding the specific methodology, strengthening governance and performance, publishing accurate evidence and addressing material risks. One generic checklist cannot guarantee results across all providers.

  • Yes. Footprint Intelligence helps organizations organize the sustainability data required for ESG rating assessments such as EcoVadis and MSCI ESG Ratings.

    The platform offers various tailored AI agents and enables companies to:

    • collect ESG and emissions data across departments

    • track sustainability performance metrics

    • document policies and initiatives

    • structure sustainability information for reporting.

    This helps organizations respond more efficiently to EcoVadis questionnaires, MSCI assessments, and other ESG rating processes.

  • Footprint Intelligence can centralize policies, metrics, public disclosures, controversies and supporting evidence, identify missing information against a configured review framework and assign improvements. MSCI’s rating remains an external, industry-relative assessment of financially relevant sustainability risks and opportunities; the platform does not control the data or judgment MSCI uses.

  • No affiliation or endorsement should be implied unless a written agreement exists. The page should state that MSCI and MSCI ESG Ratings are trademarks/services of MSCI or its affiliates and that Footprint Intelligence is an independent software provider. Product and legal owners should approve the precise trademark notice.

  • The workflow can compare available company data and evidence with configured themes, highlight missing or outdated disclosures and organize identified controversies for review. It cannot guarantee visibility into MSCI’s proprietary research, weights or future methodology. Publish the agent’s actual input sources and refresh cadence.

  • Yes. Identified gaps can become tasks with owners, deadlines, evidence and review status, and actions can be tracked through approval. The company decides whether a recommendation is appropriate and what is publicly disclosed; the tool should not encourage disclosure solely to “game” a rating.

  • No. MSCI applies its own current methodology, peer comparison and external research and may change a rating independently. Footprint Intelligence can improve data organization, evidence quality and response readiness, but cannot guarantee a rating, rating timing or improvement.

Climate Risk Assessment

  • A climate risk assessment evaluates how climate change may impact a company’s operations, assets, and supply chains.

    Climate risks are typically divided into two categories:

    • Physical risks — such as extreme weather, flooding, drought, or heatwaves

    • Transition risks — such as regulatory changes, carbon pricing, or shifts in market demand.

    Understanding these risks helps companies prepare for long-term climate impacts and integrate sustainability into business strategy.

  • Climate change can create financial, operational, and regulatory risks for organizations.

    Assessing these risks helps companies:

    • identify vulnerabilities in operations and supply chains

    • strengthen long-term resilience

    • support ESG disclosures

    • prepare for regulatory requirements such as CSRD.

  • Footprint Intelligence helps organizations structure climate risk assessments by mapping climate risks to business activities and sustainability disclosures.

    The platform helps companies document risks, analyze potential impacts, and integrate climate considerations into sustainability and corporate strategy

  • The workflow can document acute and chronic physical risks—such as flood, heat, drought, wildfire or extreme weather—and transition risks related to policy, technology, market, reputation and legal exposure. Actual hazard datasets and risk models depend on the licensed configuration; publish a current source list before making risk-specific coverage claims.

  • Yes. Risks can be linked to locations, assets, entities, processes, suppliers or value-chain stages and rolled up into management views. Granularity depends on the location and operational data available. Supplier-level results should distinguish a geographic screening from a detailed facility assessment.

  • Users can configure near-, medium- and long-term horizons and compare selected climate or transition scenarios. The public answer should name only datasets and scenario families licensed in the current product, including version, resolution and limitations. Scenario analysis explores plausible futures; it is not a prediction.

  • Risks can be linked to financial drivers such as revenue, asset damage, downtime, operating cost, capital expenditure, insurance or financing assumptions. The platform can model ranges and scenarios, but quantified impacts depend on customer assumptions and data and should not be presented as certain forecasts. Finance and risk owners approve the method.

  • The workflow can organize governance, strategy, risk-management, metrics and scenario-analysis evidence and map it to ESRS E1 and IFRS S2 disclosures. IFRS S2 (https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/ifrs-sustainability-standards-navigator/ifrs-s2-climate-related-disclosures/) incorporates climate-related physical and transition risks and builds on the TCFD architecture. Applicable disclosure conclusions remain the customer’s responsibility.

  • Each risk assessment can retain scenario, horizon, source data, score or financial assumption, evidence, owner, reviewer and version. Changes to methodology are logged and prior results remain available. This creates traceability for reporting and management review without claiming that the risk estimate is objectively certain.

  • Yes. Approved climate risks and opportunities can be linked to financial-materiality IROs, ESRS disclosures, controls, targets and mitigation/adaptation measures. The connection avoids duplicate assessment while preserving the different purposes of risk management and materiality reporting.