3 Oct 2011 11:12
Interfax International Group on October 3, 2011 presented a fundamental efficiency appraisal rating for 100 major Russian companies in the real economic sector (http://interfax-era.ru/reitingi-predpriyatii/2009), and for 3,774 enterprises in Russia, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan (http://interfax-era.ru/reitingi-predpriyatii/2009). This project was run in cooperation with the natural resources oversight service Rosprirodnadzor http://interfax-era.ru/novosti/rassylka-rosprirodnadzora and the governments in most Russian regions in order to make the companies polled more transparent and the appraisals much more accurate.
The companies were grouped into regional rating lists (http://interfax-era.ru/reitingi-predpriyatii/po-regionam), depending on the region they are based in, so the regional leaders could use the results of the work done to best advantage.
"The final rating was drawn up on the basis of four criteria:
Eco-energy efficiency;
Technological efficiency;
Efficiency dynamics;
Transparency of eco-energy reports," said Director of the Interfax-ERA environmental and energy rating agency (http://interfax-era.ru/) Alexander Martynov.
The appraisal methods applied (http://interfax-era.ru/metodologiya), are based on the use of exclusively physically measurable and regularly measured indices, taken from questionnaires, voluntarily provided by company managers, and also borrowed from Interfax‘s SPARK system (http://spark.interfax.ru/Front/index.aspx) and other open sources, all of which makes the results of the appraisal verifiable on the one hand, and, on the other, absolutely immune to influences. If the data found was not transparent enough, the appraisal was made on the basis of average efficiency indices at similar companies in the given region. The Interfax rating of the technological potential of the Russian regions (the efficiency of the production of Gross Regional Product), http://interfax-era.ru/reitingi-regionov/2009/otsenka-tekhnicheskogo-potentsiala, drawn up jointly with the United Russia party, was used to make such an appraisal.
The companies‘ eco-efficiency is defined on the basis of the quantity of output (in natural and value terms) per unit of energy spent, and of the aggregate environmental impact in six categories, Martynov said.
The companies Coca-Cola, Goznak, Mars and United Confectionary Manufacturers, whose production technology is characterized by low energy input and minimal impact on the natural environment, are the leaders in this index. Electricity generating companies are at the opposite end of the rating in terms of eco-energy efficiency.
The technological efficiency of the companies‘ equipment is assessed as a ratio between the aggregate number of waste-impacts on the environment and the volume of the work done by the company (consumed primary energy). A large volume of waste per unit of the work done indicates that the company‘s "engine" is "emitting too much smoke," Martynov said.
The leaders in this category are energy companies, first of all electricity distribution ones (Moscow United Electric Grid Company [MOESK], MRSK holding and the FSK grid company) and some generating companies.
Efficiency dynamics is the average integral change in efficiency (eco-energy and technological), observed between 2000 and 2009 (+/-% per year).
In this category, ratings depend on the modernization of the production equipment and degree of production organization, not technology. "Leadership in the dynamics category is not technologically predetermined. Therefore the chemicals companies Uralkali and Silvinit go together with the generating company Tatenergo, the food companies PepsiCo and Wimm-Bill-Dunn, the united metallurgical company OMK and the oil company Tatneft.
The transparency of eco-energy reports is the ratio between the open (published) parameters or the parameters entered on the questionnaire, and the overall number of parameters used in the appraisal. It reflects the company management‘s responsibility (the ability to answer the questions asked) and the authenticity of the efficiency assessment, made on the basis of these answers. Therefore, enterprises and companies, whose transparency index is below 50% are entered on the gray graphs of the chart and on the gray pages in the analytical system of the website, which points to a rough estimate.
Uralkali, Mosvodokanal and Nizhnekamskneftekhim‘s leadership in the transparency category indicates that the management is in possession of information and has personnel, skilled in enhancing efficiency, Martynov said.
The methodology devised and the organizational mechanisms applied will be used to monitor the companies‘ fundamental efficiency each year and help widen the use of monitoring in the practice of state and corporate governance, Martynov said.
Interfax presents fundamental efficiency rating for Russia‘s 100 leading companies and 3,500 enterprises
The companies were grouped into regional rating lists (http://interfax-era.ru/reitingi-predpriyatii/po-regionam), depending on the region they are based in, so the regional leaders could use the results of the work done to best advantage.
"The final rating was drawn up on the basis of four criteria:
Eco-energy efficiency;
Technological efficiency;
Efficiency dynamics;
Transparency of eco-energy reports," said Director of the Interfax-ERA environmental and energy rating agency (http://interfax-era.ru/) Alexander Martynov.
The appraisal methods applied (http://interfax-era.ru/metodologiya), are based on the use of exclusively physically measurable and regularly measured indices, taken from questionnaires, voluntarily provided by company managers, and also borrowed from Interfax‘s SPARK system (http://spark.interfax.ru/Front/index.aspx) and other open sources, all of which makes the results of the appraisal verifiable on the one hand, and, on the other, absolutely immune to influences. If the data found was not transparent enough, the appraisal was made on the basis of average efficiency indices at similar companies in the given region. The Interfax rating of the technological potential of the Russian regions (the efficiency of the production of Gross Regional Product), http://interfax-era.ru/reitingi-regionov/2009/otsenka-tekhnicheskogo-potentsiala, drawn up jointly with the United Russia party, was used to make such an appraisal.
The companies‘ eco-efficiency is defined on the basis of the quantity of output (in natural and value terms) per unit of energy spent, and of the aggregate environmental impact in six categories, Martynov said.
The companies Coca-Cola, Goznak, Mars and United Confectionary Manufacturers, whose production technology is characterized by low energy input and minimal impact on the natural environment, are the leaders in this index. Electricity generating companies are at the opposite end of the rating in terms of eco-energy efficiency.
The technological efficiency of the companies‘ equipment is assessed as a ratio between the aggregate number of waste-impacts on the environment and the volume of the work done by the company (consumed primary energy). A large volume of waste per unit of the work done indicates that the company‘s "engine" is "emitting too much smoke," Martynov said.
The leaders in this category are energy companies, first of all electricity distribution ones (Moscow United Electric Grid Company [MOESK], MRSK holding and the FSK grid company) and some generating companies.
Efficiency dynamics is the average integral change in efficiency (eco-energy and technological), observed between 2000 and 2009 (+/-% per year).
In this category, ratings depend on the modernization of the production equipment and degree of production organization, not technology. "Leadership in the dynamics category is not technologically predetermined. Therefore the chemicals companies Uralkali and Silvinit go together with the generating company Tatenergo, the food companies PepsiCo and Wimm-Bill-Dunn, the united metallurgical company OMK and the oil company Tatneft.
The transparency of eco-energy reports is the ratio between the open (published) parameters or the parameters entered on the questionnaire, and the overall number of parameters used in the appraisal. It reflects the company management‘s responsibility (the ability to answer the questions asked) and the authenticity of the efficiency assessment, made on the basis of these answers. Therefore, enterprises and companies, whose transparency index is below 50% are entered on the gray graphs of the chart and on the gray pages in the analytical system of the website, which points to a rough estimate.
Uralkali, Mosvodokanal and Nizhnekamskneftekhim‘s leadership in the transparency category indicates that the management is in possession of information and has personnel, skilled in enhancing efficiency, Martynov said.
The methodology devised and the organizational mechanisms applied will be used to monitor the companies‘ fundamental efficiency each year and help widen the use of monitoring in the practice of state and corporate governance, Martynov said.