Our carbon footprint was mapped using ISO 14064 PART 1 – 4, which follows the standards recommended in ‘The Greenhouse Gas Protocol’ (from the World Resource Institute, World Business Council for Sustainable Development,). These divide greenhouse gas emissions produced by an organisation into three categories (These divide greenhouse gas emissions produced by an organisation into three categories (Scope 1 – direct emissions from operations including fuel combustion in buildings and company owned vehicles; Scope 2 – Indirect emissions generated from the purchase of electricity to power offices and regions; Scope 3 – other indirect emissions generated from sources we do not control but can directly reduce through our behaviours such as air travel and waste sent to landfill).

As part of environmental and sustainability awareness, we have included GHG emission data from material subsidiaries in our boundary condition. Following the disposal of Kindoc Airways, the baseline carbon footprint may need recalculation to reflect the changes in the Scope 1 emissions. Kindoc Airways (Jet Fuel) was making substantial impact to the entire Scope 1 emissions. However, It must be noted that in the unforeseeable future, whenever the need arises, the acquisition or disposal of any of the business entities included in the boundary condition will not prompt the recalculation of the IDC baseline carbon footprint as this business partners report separately their carbon footprint.

Each individual subsidiary reports on its specific GHG inventories for the financial year 2016/7 (1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017).

Segmentation of the total carbon footprint estimate reveals that Scope 1 emissions increased from 3% to 16% on addition of the emission data from subsidiaries (Fig 1). While Scope 2 emissions increased from 52% to 84% on addition of emission data from subsidiaries. Scope 3 emission data has been excluded from the discussion due to its complexity in nature and various challenges in data collection by subsidiaries.

The calculation of the GHG inventories showed that all material operational subsidiaries emit more than 100 000tCO2e each. The largest emitting company was Scaw Metal group emitting approximately 58% (~716 553tCO2e) at an intensity of 1.68 (per product) in this reporting year. This is followed by Foskor (Pty) Ltd emitting approximately 38% (~467 806tCO2e) with the intensity of 1.68 (per product) and the IDC Head office emitting approximately <1% (5 638tCO2e) at an intensity of 6.64 (per employee). In expanding on their GHG reporting and moving forward on their journey towards a low carbon economy it is recommended that we continue to annually calculate our GHG inventory using most recently published emission factors. Subsidiaries are expected to expand their reporting on other indirect emissions (process emissions) to understand the emissions in their value chain.

In view of the segmentation of our total carbon footprint estimate, Scope 1 emissions increased from 7% to 27% on addition of the emission data from subsidiaries. While Scope 2 emissions increased from 52% to 73% on addition of emission data from subsidiaries. Scope 3 emission data has been excluded from the discussion due to its complexity in nature and various challenges in data collection by subsidiaries. It can be inferred that our GHG emission inventory showed substantial increase on addition of subsidiaries emission data. Scaw Metal (per scope) shows the highest emissions relative to other business partners with energy consumption amounting to 2 132 924GJ (reflect the nature of the its business operation of scrap metal recycling and fabrication). Foskor emissions per scope are the second highest relative to the other subsidiaries at energy consumption of 1 739 133GJ. The bulk of the emissions are predominantly operational in nature. Our energy consumption is far low at 18 661GJ relative to material subsidiaries (see table 1).

The IDC energy consumption data

** Energy intensity per product

While we are proud to roll out our carbon management system in the next financial year, the carbon footprint management strategy as aligned to our environmental strategy informs the governance roadmap, and have been developed to mirror principles of King III that view governance, strategy and sustainability as being inseparable. In line with the Code’s recommendations, good practice requires that economic, social and environmental issues be included in corporate strategy, management, reporting and assurance throughout the year, in the same way as financial matters are dealt with. However, it should be noted that this is part of the voluntary reporting section of a company’s GHG inventory. In addition, subsidiaries have been advised to develop and implement their individual carbon management systems to ensure best practice in reporting. We are forging ahead in identifying gaps in the calculation of carbon emissions by our material business partners with the intention to be inclusive, transparent and more so with the intention of reduction.

In the past years, our emphasis has been placed on actual activity data, and consolidated net greenhouse gas emissions for the year ending March. At this stage, emission reduction target is not yet set for reasons associated with progressive business consolidation, acquisitions and disposals of some material business partners (e.g. Scaw metals groups, Kindoc Airways, Herdmans SA (Pty) Ltd). Carbon offset remains our future important focus area towards attaining carbon neutrality in which carbon credits generated through green project finance will be utilised. A snapshot of green projects financed to-date have been included.

The South African Government’s 2016/17 budget mentioned its intention to revisit the carbon tax implementation by mid-2017. The carbon tax starts at R120 per ton of CO2e, increasing at 10% per year and limited to Scope 1 emissions and with basic free allowance for business across certain sectors to the amount of 60% of their annual Scope 1 emissions. An emission benchmark per unit of output will be defined for each sector. The proposed carbon tax policy paper as announced by National Treasury will have a negative direct and indirect financial impact on the IDC and its subsidiaries. The direct impact will be through total carbon tax based on the calculated carbon footprint of the IDC and its subsidiaries. The indirect impacts on its investments, which might lead to reduced profits at revenue generating entities.

The amount of the tax will not only depend on the IDC shareholding and the material consumption of the subsidiary, but also on the total direct stationary emissions that the subsidiary produces during its operational activities e.g. IDC has the largest shareholding in Scaw Metal Group and Foskor (Pty) Ltd. However, the associated carbon tax of Sasol Group is by far greater than all due to the level of emissions. Moreover, companies will be liable for the payment of carbon tax even if they are not profitable because tax is on GHG emissions.




The IT department received a clean annual external audit report for the 2017 financial year. The external auditors concluded that the IT environment at the IDC could be relied upon for financial reporting purposes. The clean audit was as a result of the department adhering to industry best practices and stringent IT governance process controls.

The provisioning of digital technology solutions by the IT department to enable and support the corporation’s business value chain has become a critical business competence and priority. The rollout of digital approach services such as online application for funding, social media and video conferencing solutions has further enabled and improved customer centricity and expanded market/client reach.

The key IT strategic initiatives achieved during the year under review included:

  • Installation of new data backup, server and storage infrastructure technologies for improved business continuity, service availability, accessibility and performance;
  • Continuous strengthening of detective, forensic, audit and preventative cyber security controls to protect the corporation against new and evolving security threat vectors and actors, such as unauthorized access to the corporation’s information assets and Ransomware malware among others; and
  • Improved digital reach on IT enabled client services such as the new online application for funding system.



The IT department is in the process of upgrading technological infrastructure and services at our regional offices to improve regional service presence, availability and unified communication (for voice and video).

With the corporation’s current continuous business process improvement initiative, the IT department is aligning IT systems to the new re-engineered business processes with particular emphasis on the application for submission business processes.


The IDC is committed to promoting economic growth through the advancement of preferential procurement and the promotion of local production. Spend with local suppliers refers to all discretionary procurement spend facilitated through the IDC Procurement department with suppliers of materials, products and services trading from premises which are physically located within the borders of South Africa.

During the financial year, the IDC spent more than 90% of its total discretionary procurement spend with locally-based suppliers.

The IDC is a Level 4 BEE Contributor based on an independent review undertaken by a SANAS (South African National Accreditation System) accredited rating agency as assessed under the Amended B-BBEE Codes that came into effect in May 2015.

During the year under review, the IDC implemented its Supplier Development (SD) Program with the objective to accelerate sustainable development and to support small and emerging black-owned suppliers of the IDC. Beneficiaries of the SD Program were assisted with essential business support interventions which included business skills training, mentoring, coaching and the supply of essential business tools. The outcome of the SD Program has in some instances resulted in the creation of new job opportunities in some of the SD Beneficiary companies and have seen an increase in new business opportunities.

At the 2016 annual ‘All About Public Procurement’ awards, which aim to reward public sector procurement professionals and recognise organisations doing excellent work, the IDC was declared the winner of the award for the Most Empowered State Owned Entity (SOE) in compliance to the B-BBEE Adjusted Generic Scorecard for Public Sector and Localisation.

Through its commitment to Government’s national broad-based black economic empowerment (“B-BBEE”) and transformation goals, the IDC is playing an important role in supporting Government’s initiatives towards a sustainable economy and people who actively participate in it.

"Our funding for Fair Price Furnishers, with its 100% black ownership, supported the company to increase its capacity. Fair Price Furnishers manufactures a range of furniture products for low-to middle-income groups. IDC's funding enabled the company to purchase plant and equipment to expand its operation in Brits, North West. The funding created 183 jobs.





Customer feedback is part of our customer experience strategy to assist us in improving our service levels at every touch-point. In this respect, we conduct satisfaction surveys to measure service performance, and identify service issues and remedial actions.

The Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey is aimed at existing customers, i.e., those whose funding has been approved, and thus would have gone through the entire IDC application process, including post-investment. Clients who are in Legal and Workout & Restructuring are excluded from the survey.

The study is conducted by an independent research agency, which uses a 10-point scale where a score of 7/10 is considered good, 8-9/10 as very good, and 10 as excellent.

IDC scored 7.9 for overall service experience in the 2016/2017 financial year. Altogether 250 respondents participated in the survey and were contacted on a random basis to ensure representative sample sizes across the various Strategic Business Units.

Respondents were also asked to rate the IDC on specific service attributes that were categorised under four dimensions, namely: (a) Solutions/Products and Services, (b) Service Efficiency, (c) Customer Interface, and (d) Business Approach. The overall scores for the four dimensions are depicted below.


Overall, clients are satisfied, with areas of concern being responsiveness and open communication.

Key strengths

  • Satisfactory service levels
  • A supportive partner
  • Competitive pricing/good interest rates
  • Is professional in business dealings
  • Provides applicable solutions/products that meet client’s requirements

Suggestions for improvements

  • Turnaround time, including timeous responses to queries/enquiries
  • Improve communication – more often and better
  • Streamline the application process


The findings enable the corporation to have a full view and understanding of the customer experience through the application and after-care journey. This has allowed us, where applicable, to implement corrective actions with speed and address service issues that might have arisen when customers interacted with us.

Plans for the 2017/18 financial year

We will continue to stay close to our clients and keep abreast of clients’ needs and expectations to continue being the pre-eminent funder of choice, whilst ensuring that high standards of service levels are consistently achieved and maintained.


The following table provides an assessment of the Corporation’s compliance with King III:



General standard disclosures