Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 Italy 60 Report

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 Italy 60 Report On behalf of 534 investors with assets of US$64 trillion Report written for Carbon Disclosure Project by: Carbon Disclosure Partner: Carbon Disclosure Project info@cdproject.net +44 (0) 20 7970 5660 www.cdproject.net

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 This report and all of the public responses from corporations are available to download free of charge from www.cdproject.net. CDP Members 2010 ABRAPP - Associação Brasileira das Entidades Fechadas de Previdência Complementar Aegon N.V. Netherlands Akbank T.A.. Allianz Global Investors AG ATP Group Aviva Investors AXA Group Banco Bradesco S.A. Bank of America Merrill Lynch BBVA BlackRock BP Investment Management Limited California Public Employees Retirement System California State Teachers Retirement System Calvert Group Catholic Super CCLA Investment Management Ltd Co-operative Asset Management Essex Investment Management, LLC Ethos Foundation Generation Investment Management HSBC Holdings plc ING KLP Insurance Legg Mason, Inc. The London Pensions Fund Authority Mergence Africa Investments (Pty) Limited Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (MUFG) Morgan Stanley National Australia Bank Limited Neuberger Berman Newton Investment Management Limited Nordea Investment Management Northwest and Ethical Investments LP PFA Pension Raiffeisen Schweiz RBS Group Robeco Rockefeller & Co. SRI Group Russell Investments Schroders Second Swedish National Pension Fund (AP2) Sompo Japan Insurance Inc. Standard Chartered PLC Sun Life Financial Inc. TD Asset Management Inc. TDAM USA Inc. The Wellcome Trust Zurich Cantonal Bank

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 CDP Signatories 2010 534 financial institutions with assets of over US$64 trillion were signatories to the CDP 2010 information request dated February 1st, 2010, including: Aberdeen Asset Managers Aberdeen Immobilien KAG Active Earth Investment Management Acuity Investment Management Addenda Capital Inc. Advanced Investment Partners Advantage Asset Managers (Pty) Ltd AEGON Magyarország Befektetési Alapkezelo Zrt. Aegon N.V. AEGON-INDUSTRIAL Fund Management Co., Ltd Aeneas Capital Advisors AGF Management Limited AIG Asset Management Akbank T.A.S. Alberta Investment Management Corporation (AIMCo) Alberta Teachers Retirement Fund Alcyone Finance Allianz Global Investors AG Allianz Group Altshuler Shaham AMP Capital Investors AmpegaGerling Investment GmbH Amundi Asset Management ANBIMA - Brazilian Financial and Capital Markets Association APG Asset Management Aprionis ARIA (Australian Reward Investment Alliance) Arma Portföy Yönetimi A.S. ASB Community Trust ASM Administradora de Recursos S.A. ASN Bank Assicurazioni Generali Spa ATP Group Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited Australian Central Credit Union incorporating Savings & Loans Credit Union Australian Ethical Investment Limited AustralianSuper AVANA Invest GmbH Aviva Investors Aviva plc AvivaSA Emeklilik ve Hayat A.S. AXA Group Baillie Gifford & Co. Bakers Investment Group Banco Bradesco S.A. Banco de Crédito del Perú BCP Banco de Galicia y Buenos Aires S.A. Banco do Brazil Banco Santander Banco Santander (Brasil) Banesprev Fundo Banespa de Seguridade Social Banesto (Banco Español de Crédito S.A.) Bank of America Merrill Lynch Bank Sarasin & Co, Ltd Bank Vontobel Bankhaus Schelhammer & Schattera Kapitalanlagegesellschaft m.b.h. BANKINTER S.A. BankInvest Banque Degroof Barclays Group BBC Pension Trust Ltd BBVA Bedfordshire Pension Fund Beutel Goodman and Co. Ltd BioFinance Administração de Recursos de Terceiros Ltda BlackRock Blue Marble Capital Management Limited Blue Shield of California Group Blumenthal Foundation BMO Financial Group BNP Paribas Investment Partners BNY Mellon Boston Common Asset Management, LLC BP Investment Management Limited Brasilprev Seguros e Previdência S/A. British Columbia Investment Management Corporation (bcimc) BT Investment Management The Bullitt Foundation Busan Bank CAAT Pension Plan Cadiz Holdings Limited Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec Caisse des Dépôts Caixa de Previdência dos Funcionários do Banco do Nordeste do Brasil (CAPEF) Caixa Econômica Federal Caixa Geral de Depósitos Caja de Ahorros de Valencia, Castellón y Valencia, BANCAJA Caja Navarra California Public Employees Retirement System California State Teachers Retirement System California State Treasurer Calvert Group Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Canadian Friends Service Committee (Quakers) CAPESESP Capital Innovations, LLC CARE Super Pty Ltd Carlson Investment Management Carmignac Gestion Catherine Donnelly Foundation Catholic Super Cbus Superannuation Fund CCLA Investment Management Ltd Celeste Funds Management Limited The Central Church Fund of Finland Central Finance Board of the Methodist Church Ceres, Inc. Cheyne Capital Management (UK) LLP Christian Super Christopher Reynolds Foundation CI Mutual Funds Signature Advisors CIBC Clean Yield Group, Inc. ClearBridge Advisors Climate Change Capital Group Ltd Close Brothers Group plc The Collins Foundation Colonial First State Global Asset Management Comite syndical national de retraite Bâtirente Commerzbank AG CommInsure Companhia de Seguros Aliança do Brasil Compton Foundation, Inc. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds Co-operative Asset Management Co-operative Financial Services (CFS) The Co-operators Group Ltd Corston-Smith Asset Management Sdn. Bhd. Crédit Agricole S.A. Credit Suisse Daegu Bank Daiwa Securities Group Inc. The Daly Foundation de Pury Pictet Turrettini & Cie S.A. DekaBank Deutsche Girozentrale Deutsche Asset Management Deutsche Bank AG Deutsche Postbank Vermögensmanagement S.A., Luxemburg Development Bank of Japan Inc. Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) Dexia Asset Management DnB NOR ASA Domini Social Investments LLC Dongbu Insurance Co., Ltd. DWS Investment GmbH Earth Capital Partners LLP East Sussex Pension Fund Ecclesiastical Investment Management Economus Instituto de Seguridade Social The Edward W. Hazen Foundation EEA Group Ltd Element Investment Managers ELETRA - Fundação Celg de Seguros e Previdência Environment Agency Active Pension Fund Epworth Investment Management Ltd Equilibrium Capital Group Erste Group Bank AG Essex Investment Management, LLC Ethos Foundation Eureko B.V.

CDP Sigantories 2010 Eurizon Capital SGR Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada Pension Plan for Clergy and Lay Workers Evli Bank Plc F&C Management Ltd FAELCE - Fundação Coelce de Seguridade Social FASERN Fundação Cosern de Previdência Complementar Fédéris Gestion d Actifs FIDURA Capital Consult GmbH FIM Asset Management Ltd Financière de Champlain FIRA. - Banco de Mexico First Affirmative Financial Network First Swedish National Pension Fund (AP1) FirstRand Ltd. Five Oceans Asset Management Florida State Board of Administration (SBA) Folketrygdfondet Folksam Fondaction CSN Fondation de Luxembourg Fonds de Réserve pour les Retraites FRR Forward Management, LLC Fourth Swedish National Pension Fund, (AP4) Frankfurter Service Kapitalanlage-Gesellschaft mbh FRANKFURT-TRUST Investment Gesellschaft mbh Friends Provident Holdings (UK) Limited Front Street Capital Fukoku Capital Management, Inc. Fundação AMPLA de Seguridade Social - Brasiletros Fundação Atlântico de Seguridade Social Fundação Banrisul de Seguridade Social Fundação Codesc de Seguridade Social - FUSESC Fundação de Assistência e Previdência Social do BNDES - FAPES Fundação Forluminas de Seguridade Social Fundação Itaúsa Industrial Fundação Promon de Previdência Social Fundação São Francisco de Seguridade Social Fundação Vale do Rio Doce de Seguridade Social - VALIA FUNDIÁGUA - Fundação de Previdência da Companhia de Saneamento e Ambiental do Distrito Federal Futuregrowth Asset Management Gartmore Investment Management Limited Generali Deutschland Holding AG Generation Investment Management Genus Capital Management Gjensidige Forsikring GLG Partners LP GLS Gemeinschaftsbank eg, Germany Goldman Sachs & Co. GOOD GROWTH INSTITUT für globale Vermögensentwicklung mbh Governance for Owners LLP Government Employees Pension Fund ( GEPF ), Republic of South Africa Green Cay Asset Management Green Century Funds Groupe Investissement Responsable Inc. GROUPE OFI AM Grupo Banco Popular Gruppo Monte Paschi Guardian Ethical Management Inc Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation Guosen Securities Co., LTD. Hang Seng Bank HANSAINVEST Hanseatische Investment GmbH Harbourmaster Capital Harrington Investments, Inc The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. Hastings Funds Management Limited Hazel Capital LLP HDFC Bank Ltd Health Super Fund Henderson Global Investors Hermes Fund Managers HESTA Super Hospitals of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP) HSBC Global Asset Management (Deutschland) GmbH HSBC Holdings plc HSBC INKA Internationale Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbh Hyundai Marine & Fire Insurance IDBI Bank Limited Illinois State Treasurer Ilmarinen Mutual Pension Insurance Company Impax Asset Management Ltd Industrial Bank Industrial Bank of Korea Industry Funds Management Infrastructure Development Finance Company Ltd. (IDFC) ING Insight Investment Management (Global) Ltd Instituto de Seguridade Social dos Correios e Telégrafos - Postalis Instituto Infraero de Seguridade Social - INFRAPREV Insurance Australia Group Investec Asset Management Irish Life Investment Managers Itaú Unibanco Banco Múltiplo S.A. J.P. Morgan Asset Management Janus Capital Group Inc. The Japan Research Institute, Limited Jarislowsky Fraser Limited The Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust Jubitz Family Foundation Jupiter Asset Management K&H Investment Fund Management / K&H Befektetési Alapkezelo Zrt KB Asset Management KB Financial Group KB Kookmin Bank KBC Asset Management NV KCPS and Company KDB Asset Management Co., Ltd. Kennedy Associates Real Estate Counsel, LP KEPLER-FONDS Kapitalanlagegesellschaft m.b.h. KfW Bankengruppe KLP Insurance Korea Investment & Trust Management Korea Technology Finance Corporation KPA Pension Kyobo AXA Investment Managers La Banque Postale Asset Management La Financière Responsable Landsorganisationen i Sverige LBBW - Landesbank Baden-Württemberg LBBW Asset Management Investmentgesellschaft mbh LD Lønmodtagernes Dyrtidsfond Legal & General Group plc Legg Mason, Inc. Lend Lease Investment Management Light Green Advisors, LLC Living Planet Fund Management Company S.A. Local Authority Pension Fund Forum The Local Government Pensions Institution Local Government Super Lombard Odier Darier Hentsch & Cie The London Pensions Fund Authority Lothian Pension Fund Macif Gestion Macquarie Group Limited Magnolia Charitable Trust Maine State Treasurer Man Group plc Maple-Brown Abbott Limited Marc J. Lane Investment Management, Inc. Maryland State Treasurer Matrix Asset Management McLean Budden MEAG Munich Ergo Asset Management GmbH Meeschaert Gestion Privée Meiji Yasuda Life Insurance Company Merck Family Fund Mergence Africa Investments (Pty) Limited Meritas Mutual Funds MetallRente GmbH Metzler Investment GmbH MFS Investment Management Midas International Asset Management Miller/Howard Investments Mirae Asset Global Investments Co. Ltd. Mistra, The Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (MUFG) Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co.,Ltd Mizuho Financial Group, Inc. Mn Services Monega Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbh Morgan Stanley Motor Trades Association of Australia 5

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 Superannuation Fund Pty Ltd Mutual Insurance Company Pension-Fennia Natcan Investment Management The Nathan Cummings Foundation National Australia Bank Limited National Bank of Canada National Bank of Kuwait National Grid Electricity Group of the Electricity Supply Pension Scheme National Grid UK Pension Scheme National Pensions Reserve Fund of Ireland National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) Natixis Nedbank Limited Needmor Fund Nelson Capital Management, LLC Nest Sammelstiftung Neuberger Berman New Amsterdam Partners LLC New Jersey Division of Investment New Mexico State Treasurer New York City Employees Retirement System New York City Teachers Retirement System New York State Common Retirement Fund (NYSCRF) Newton Investment Management Limited NFU Mutual Insurance Society NGS Super NH-CA Asset Management Nikko Asset Management Co., Ltd. Nissay Asset Management Corporation NORD/LB Kapitalanlagegesellschaft AG Nordea Investment Management Norfolk Pension Fund Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM) Norinchukin Zenkyouren Asset Management Co., Ltd North Carolina State Treasurer Northern Ireland Local Government Officers Superannuation Committee (NILGOSC) Northern Trust Northwest and Ethical Investments LP Oddo & Cie Old Mutual plc OMERS Administration Corporation Ontario Teachers Pension Plan OP Fund Management Company Ltd Oppenheim Fonds Trust GmbH Opplysningsvesenets fond (The Norwegian Church Endowment) OPSEU Pension Trust Oregon State Treasurer Orion Asset Management LLC OTP Fund Management Plc. Pax World Funds Pensioenfonds Vervoer Pension Fund for Danish Lawyers and Economists The Pension Plan For Employees of the Public Service Alliance of Canada Pension Protection Fund Pensionsmyndigheten PETROS - The Fundação Petrobras de Seguridade Social PFA Pension PGGM Phillips, Hager & North Investment Management Ltd. PhiTrust Active Investors Pictet Asset Management SA The Pinch Group Pioneer Alapkezelo Zrt. PKA Pluris Sustainable Investments SA Pohjola Asset Management Ltd Portfolio 21 Investments Portfolio Partners Porto Seguro S.A. PRECE Previdência Complementar The Presbyterian Church in Canada PREVI Caixa de Previdência dos Funcionários do Banco do Brasil PREVIG Sociedade de Previdência Complementar Principle Capital Partners Psagot Investment House Ltd PSP Investments Q Capital Partners Co. Ltd QBE Insurance Group Limited Rabobank Raiffeisen Schweiz Railpen Investments Rathbones / Rathbone Greenbank Investments RBS Group Real Grandeza Fundação de Previdência e Assistência Social Rei Super Resona Bank, Limited Reynders McVeigh Capital Management Rhode Island General Treasurer RLAM Robeco Robert Brooke Zevin Associates, Inc Rockefeller & Co. SRI Group Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment Royal Bank of Canada RREEF Investment GmbH The Russell Family Foundation Russell Investments SAM Group Sampension KP Livsforsikring A/S Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Samsung Life Insurance Sanlam Investment Management Santa Fé Portfolios Ltda Sauren Finanzdienstleistungen GmbH & Co. KG Schroders Scotiabank Scottish Widows Investment Partnership SEB SEB Asset Management AG Second Swedish National Pension Fund (AP2) Seligson & Co Fund Management Plc Sentinel Investments SERPROS Fundo Multipatrocinado Service Employees International Union Benefit Funds Seventh Swedish National Pension Fund (AP7) The Shiga Bank, Ltd. Shinhan Bank Shinhan BNP Paribas Investment Trust Management Co., Ltd Shinkin Asset Management Co., Ltd Siemens Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbh Signet Capital Management Ltd SIRA Asset Management SMBC Friend Securities Co., LTD Smith Pierce, LLC SNS Asset Management Social(k) Sociedade Ibgeana de Assistência e Seguridade (SIAS) Solaris Investment Management Limited Sompo Japan Insurance Inc. Sopher Investment Management SPF Beheer bv Sprucegrove Investment Management Ltd Standard Bank Group Standard Chartered PLC Standard Life Investments State Street Corporation Storebrand ASA Strathclyde Pension Fund Stratus Group Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation Sumitomo Mitsui Card Company, Limited Sumitomo Mitsui Finance & Leasing Co., Ltd Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group Sumitomo Trust & Banking 6

Foreword Paul Dickinson, Executive Chairman Carbon Disclosure Project Carbon management continues to rise as a strategic priority for many businesses. This is fuelled by opportunities to reduce energy costs; secure energy supply; protect the business from climate change risk and damaged reputation; as well as generating revenue and remaining competitive. Companies globally are seizing commercial carbon opportunities, often acting ahead of any policy requirements. The demand for primary corporate climate change data is growing it is now accessed through Bloomberg and Google Finance. It is also used by an increasing number of investment research providers and sell-side brokers to generate new insights into the impacts of climate change on the global industry and to highlight the associated opportunities. CDP has also launched two index products based on CDP data the FTSE CDP Carbon Strategy Index series and the Markit Carbon Disclosure Leadership Index. These products give investors exposure to companies better positioned in the transition to a low carbon economy. Key focus areas CDP has set three key focus areas for the immediate future. One is to work with companies and the users of its data to continue improving quality and comparability. Data that supports action is central to fulfilling CDP s mission. As part of this process, CDP is launching a new package, Reporter Services, exclusively for responding companies, to help them develop their carbon management strategies through increased data quality, deeper analysis and the sharing of best practice. Never forget that climate change is a global problem and requires a global solution. That is why CDP s second key focus is on globalizing all programs in the major economies in the coming years. Beyond CDP s Investor program, which sits at the heart of the initiative, CDP intends to grow its Supply Chain and Public Procurement programs, as well as CDP Water Disclosure, in order to maximize the fulfillment of CDP s mission. The third key focus is mitigation and emissions reduction. The number of companies within the Global 500 sample (FTSE Global Equity Series) reporting reduction targets has already increased fourfold since CDP s first reporting year. But this is just the first step. CDP remains committed to help advance emissions reductions and works with investors and industry to achieve this. Looking ahead It is through partnerships that we can achieve the largest impact. CDP is delighted to be working with local partners and report writers such as Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena and PricewaterhouseCoopers Italy, its global advisor PricewaterhouseCoopers and its global sponsor Bank of America, as well as Accenture, Microsoft and SAP to accelerate its mission and highlight the huge opportunities for business to capitalize on the transition to a low carbon economy. These are exciting times for business, with significant changes coming to the way we produce and consume energy. New power from low or zero emissions sources is an urgent priority for climate change policy that simultaneously helps deliver energy security. New technologies such as smart grids, electric vehicles, alternative fuel sources, advanced telepresence videoconferencing, are showing a clear case for business growth with reduced emissions. The opportunities for business are enormous it is through the intelligent investment of capital into the right solutions, identified by the business community, that we will achieve the low carbon future we need. Paul Dickinson CEO, Crbon Disclosure Project 7

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 Message from the CDP Italy Report Partner PwC Italy PwC Italy is proud to have supported the Investor Group on Climate Change for the first time this year in preparing the CDP 2010 report for Italy and to have contributed to providing institutional investors with a unique analysis of how the key corporate operators in the Italian environment respond to climate change due to the rise of greenhouse gas emissions and how they operate in carbon management, for a coming convergence towards a low-carbon future. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time and information related to it has grown, year after year, increasingly important to meaningful analysis by the investment community. For the business community, as a matter of fact, there are not only risks but also several opportunities related to climate change, be they physical impacts or new challenges posed by developments in regulations and market trends. Climate change, indeed, is one of the few issues to capture the attention of regulators, who have become increasingly demanding and vigilant about disclosure; the CSR Trends 2010 survey, in which PwC participated, and which analysed the CSR reports of over 600 companies from all over the world, it emerged that official and public attention has been driving two trends: more meaningful and consistent carbon accounting, and more thorough discussion of reduction and mitigation strategies. The CDP plays a vital role in encouraging not only quantitative, but also qualitative disclosure of climate change risks and opportunities, as well as the responses being taken by business in managing them. Further, the CDP reports provide useful information which businesses can use to benchmark their responses to climate change against their peers. In this regard it is useful to note that, from the continuous discourse of PwC with companies from all over the world about the analysis of the existence of an information gap between businesses and markets, it emerged that only a minority of investors and analysts find annual financial statements appropriate in communicating the real corporate values, while even fewer are those investors who consider annual financial statements a proactive communication tool suitable to clearly illustrate the management of corporate assets and performance. Going back to a 2007 survey, for instance, finance executives reported widespread dissatisfaction (55% of the respondents were not satisfied) with management information, and although nonfinancial information was being incorporated into management reports, there were clear differences between the quality of financial and nonfinancial information, the responsibility for the quality of which is widely dispersed throughout the organization. Businesses therefore identify non-traditional indicators as a supplementary tool of corporate communications to investors, financial analysts and rating agencies, and the information analysed in this report goes precisely in this direction. A radical change in corporate reporting has long been underway: the goal is to develop a model for external and internal reporting that supports the complexity of the business, responds to the need to communicate with the key stakeholders and can be adapted to the future changes of the company. The achievement of company s financial targets is also related to Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) strategies and factors, within which the strategies, targets and measures adopted to fight climate change play a role of considerable importance. Reporting, in all its facets, can deliver competitive advantages in a variety of ways, if it is done well. It can secure capital and credit, help win the war for talent, and build strong business relationships. But the challenge will be to do so in an increasingly complex business environment, with changing consumer tastes, heightened awareness of climate change and other external factors. All these factors interact to shift society s needs and its expectations of business. 8

Message from the CDP Italy Report Partner PwC has significant experience in reporting Non Financial Information, specifically in the ESG field, and PwC Sustainability & Climate Change team helps companies develop and implement strategies in response to this changing environment. Finally, we work with investors in developing approaches better to understand how climate change risks and opportunities may be impacting on the value of their investments. We thank those businesses in Italy that have responded to CDP 2010 and encourage the Italian business community to continue to support this important initiative. Paolo Bersani Partner Sustainability & Climate Change PwC Overview of CDP The Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) is an independent not-for-profit organization holding the largest database of primary corporate climate change information in the world. CDP furthers its mission to accelerate unified action on climate change by harnessing the collective power of corporations, investors and political leaders. In 2009, 2,500 organizations in some 60 countries around the world measured and disclosed their greenhouse gas emissions and climate change strategies through CDP, in order that they can set reduction targets and make performance improvements. In 2010, even more companies than ever before are reporting through CDP and managing their emissions. This data is made available for use by a wide audience including institutional investors, corporations, policymakers and their advisors, public sector organizations, government bodies, academics and the public. Climate change is not a problem that exists within national boundaries. That is why CDP harmonizes climate change data from organizations around the world and develops international carbon reporting standards. CDP operates the only global climate change reporting system on behalf of 534 institutional investors (holding US$64 trillion in assets under management) and some 60 purchasing organizations such as Dell, EADS, PepsiCo and Walmart. CDP was launched in 2000 to accelerate solutions to climate change by putting relevant information at the heart of business, policy and investment decisions. 9

Executive Summary The Carbon Disclosure Project is helping provide the transparency that investors and other stakeholders require to evaluate how companies are positioned to cope with Climate Change risks and opportunities. It also encourages companies to take steps towards managing their carbon emissions. The project thus provides an important complement to the EU Emissions Trading System, since more than 60% of European companies participating in CDP are not covered by the EU ETS Connie Hedegaard, European Commissioner for Climate Change Action In the ten years since the launch of the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), the quality and quantity of reporting on climate change have increased dramatically. CDP is now looking beyond disclosure to identify the companies that are taking active steps toward a lowcarbon economy. This year, CDP (backed by 534 institutional investors representing more than US$64 trillion of assets under management) sent questionnaires to more than 4,700 of the world s largest corporations, requesting information on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, on the significant risks and opportunities related to climate change and on the actions companies are taking to manage those risks and opportunities. The results are published in more than 20 geographies around the world and are freely available at www.cdproject.net. This report, CDP 2010 Italy 60, provides detailed analysis of responses including 2009 data received from the 60 largest Italian businesses on the Italian stock exchange (largest by market capitalisation on the 31 December 2009, and referred to as Italy 60 throughout this report). Consistently, any reference to CDP 2009 within this report refers to 2008 data. The Italian companies that fall under the Global 500, the world s 500 largest publicly listed companies in the FTSE Global Equity Index Series, were rated by PwC s international network, while Italian companies that fall under Europe 300 (which represents the 300 largest European companies by market capitalisation) but not in the Global 500 were rated by Crédit Agricole Cheuvreux; all the remaining Italian companies not included in other reports were rated by PwC Italy, according to the methodology developed by CDP and PwC s international network, in application of the CDP 2010 Reporting Guidance. CDP 2010 was completed against an uncertain and diverse policy backdrop at a global and local level : the modest outcome from Copenhagen drew differing responses from national governments with uncertainty about a binding international agreement causing some countries to stall in their policy progress and others to push ahead. Despite policy uncertainty respondents have retained high levels of disclosure on climate change. Companies have also continued to view regulation posing opportunities as well as risks to their business and remain concerned about the significant physical risks presented by climate change. In the context of resource constraints driven by the global financial crisis, and competing priorities such as responding to other reporting obligations as e.g. the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), larger companies were, in general, more 10

Executive Summary able than small companies to engage the resources required to complete the CDP s questionnaire this year. Investors will be seeking more detail on all aspects of carbon management strategies in the future with an ever-increasing focus on carbon performance and not just disclosure. Both the CDP questionnaire distributed to companies and the reports at global or country level or by industrial sector focus on the issues more greatly affecting, directly or indirectly, companies economic and financial Table 1 Sub-Section Questions Content Sections of the questionnarie Governance Information about the highest level of responsibility for climate change within companies Risks Analysis of regulatory, physical and "other" risks, of their impact on value chain and business, financial implications and related action taken by companies Opportunities Analysis of regulatory, physical and "other" opportunities, of their impact on value chain and business, financial implications and related action taken by companies Strategy and targets How overall group business strategy links with actions taken on risks and opportunities and emissions reduction targets set Achievements Emission reduction activities and results Emissions trading Participation in any emission trading schemes Emission reporting parameters Specific information such as sources identified, GWP and emission factor applied Scope 1, 2 & 3 reporting Emissions for Scope 1, 2 & 3 and detailed analysis (e.g. by activities, by countries ) Uncertainty range and main sources of uncertainty in data Emissions intensity and history Emissions trend and emissions intensity measurement applied (e.g. financial or activity- related ) Communications Where information about companies response to climate change/ GHG emissions are published performance, in respect of climate change management: Governance; Risks and opportunities; Strategy; Emissions reporting; Communications. The table below presents the sections and sub-sections of the questionnaire, as well as a short summary of the main contents. While the percentage of CDP 2010 respondents remained the same as in CDP 2009 with 35%, in view of the enlargement of the Italian CDP Section Governance Risks and opportunities Strategy Emissions reporting Communications The work of the Carbon Disclosure Project is crucial to the success of global green business in the 21st century. Participants in the Carbon Disclosure Project know that the safest way of reducing climate risks is to reduce emissions. They know that taking early action makes good business sense. And they know the cost of inaction on climate change will dwarf any price tag for acting today. Ban Ki-moon, UN General Secretary 11

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 Disclosure can spur innovation. The Carbon Disclosure Project collates data about the greenhouse gas emissions of many of the world s largest companies. The CDP has shown that internationally consistent disclosure not only helps to pinpoint risk but also generate opportunities. Financial Times sample from 40 to 60 companies that were asked to respond to the questionnaire, the absolute number of respondents increased from 18 to 21. As compared to CDP 2009 results, the level of in-depth examination and disclosure of the four themes above has undoubtedly improved. Clear evidence of that may be inferred from the following analysis of emission data: 33% of the Italy 60 companies have reported its Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions, while 22% have reported Scope 3 emissions; if calculated on respondents alone, percentages rise to 95% and 62% respectively, marking a pronounced increase as compared to CDP 2009 (respectively 78%, 67% and 50% for Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions). Besides, across all Italian respondents, 81% of those who disclosed emissions also had their emissions validated through an independent external verifier (equalling 28% for the Italy 60 companies), (Figure 1). Yet, global CDP 2010 Italy 60 results still lag far behind the overall Europe 300 results, which see levels of disclosure for Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions at respectively 78%, 77% and 62%, while 57% of those who disclosed emissions also had their emissions validated through an independent external verifier, more than double the corresponding Italy s rates. Below follow the main analyses Figure 1 Disclosure level Italy 60 sample 60 100% Responding companies 21 3 5% Any portion of Scope 1 emissions independently verified 17 28% Disclosing Scope 1 emissions 20 33% Disclosing Scope 2 emissions 20 33% Disclosing any Scope 3 emissions 13 22% 12

Executive Summary relating to the four key areas of corporate climate change management described above. Risk and opportunities The percentage of respondents that identified regulatory and other risks increased from 67% in 2008 to 76% in 2009 (Figure 2); the total number of companies that identify opportunities in such areas increased, too (Figure 3). Based upon the reported data, it may be clearly inferred that most respondents retained (in the case of new respondents, developed) awareness of the implications of the evolving regulatory context and reputational and market-related issues for their business. Last, physical area-related risks were identified by the same number of companies as last year, although a larger number of companies received the CDP questionnaire in 2010; in addition, related opportunities were identified by fewer companies. Emissions reporting Total Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions in 2009 equal 584.955.839 metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO 2 -e), marking a 162% rise as Figure 2 Respondents recognising risks associated with climate change Regulatory risks 12 16 Physical risks 13 13 Other significant risks 12 16 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% CDP 2010 CDP 2009 Figure 3 Respondents recognising opportunities associated with climate change Regulatory opportunities 17 15 Physical opportunities 9 12 Other significant opportunities 15 18 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% CDP 2010 CDP 2009 13

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 compared to 2008 (Figure 4). Such rise is partly due to a larger Italy s sample, which entailed a greater number of respondents, but most of all the increase can be explained through a significant extension of the in-depth analysis of Scope 3 reporting, if compared to 2008: in fact, Scope 1 and 2 emissions only amount to 258.198.813 t CO 2 -e in 2009, marking a 16% rise from the preceding year. The most carbon-intensive sectors, such as Energy, Utilities and Materials (all subject to the EU- ETS) account for 99% of overall emissions, while the tally of the emissions from the chief emitter for each sector (eni for Energy, Enel for Utilities and Italcementi for Materials) account for 92% of the overall emissions. For Italy, Scope 3 level emissions account for 44% of the total emissions, while on a global level as can be inferred from CDP 2010 Global 500 Report, this figure is as low as 39%. This seems to show that the main world companies boast more in-depth analysis and pay greater attention to Scope 3. It is worthwhile noting that the total emissions for the three above carbon-intensive sectors, referred to the respondents to CDP 2010 Global 500 Report, account for 85% of the total (8.519.019.431 t CO 2 -e out of 10.071.941.190 t CO 2 -e), revealing a more widespread involvement of global industrial sectors in emission data disclosure. Figure 4 Overall carbon emissions of the Italy 60 respondents (million t CO 2 -e) 161 Figure 5 5 (24%) 3 (14%) 42 Energy 6 376 Utilities Materials Others 3 1 1 1 Consumer Discretionary Industrials Telecommunications Services Financials Total respondents who have emission reduction targets CDP 2010 16 (76%) 11 (61%) CDP 2009 7 (39%) Total respondents who have action plans in place CDP 2010 CDP 2009 Performance The number of companies that disclosed emission targets in 2010 (16) increased from 2009 (7), as well as the number of companies declaring that emission reduction actions are in place this year (18 in 2010 as compared with 9 in 2009, see Figure 5). 18 (86%) 9 (50%) 9 (50%) 14

Executive Summary Strategy Climate change continues to be firmly on the Board agenda with 67% of respondents reporting to have a Board committee or executive body with such responsibility and the same numbers of respondents confirmed to be engaged with policy makers on possible responses to climate change including taxation, regulation and carbon trading. Furthermore, the share of companies that provide incentives for management of climate change issues, including the attainment of GHG targets is 57%. The Carbon Disclosure Leadership Index (CDLI) and the Carbon Performance Leadership Index (CPLI) What is new in the CDP 2010 Italy 60 Report is that respondents were assessed not only for their carbon disclosure (see Appendix of this Country Report for detailed scores), but also against a new indicator: the carbon performance. This indicator, which is quite new for all CDP 2010 Reports and was preceded by a pilot project at a global level in 2009, was set up to meet the growing investors expectation for topperforming companies in carbon management to be identified. The Carbon Performance Leadership Index (CPLI), launched this year by CDP, recognizes companies that are taking action to reduce global emissions by listing the companies with the highest performance scores. These carbon performance leaders have demonstrated commitment to strategy, governance, stakeholder communications and most of all, emissions reduction in their CDP responses. The CPLI complements the existing Carbon Disclosure Leadership Index (CDLI), which assesses the quality and completeness of companies reporting and carbon management. All carbon performance and disclosure scores can be found in the Appendix. Table 2 presents the Carbon Disclosure Score and Carbon Performance Band of all Italy 60 respondents. Companies belonging to the CDLI, which this year includes the top-scoring 30% of the Italy 60 respondents, (six companies in total), as well as companies belonging to the CPLI, which includes all companies that achieved a Carbon Performance Score in Band A (only one company), are both featured. As would be expected, the company which is in the top band for performance also leads on Table 2 Carbon Disclosure Score disclosure. Interestingly 5 of the 7 industry sectors to which responders belong are represented in this small group highlighting that companies are taking leading action on disclosure and performance across many areas of business, while just one sector was represented by a leading company in both the CPLI and CDLI. However, there may be a bias that in the Italy 60 sample only those companies have responded to CDP 2010 that have already established the monitoring and management of greenhouse gas emissions. Carbon Performance Score Sector eni 83 A Energy Terna 81 B Utilities A2A 81 C Utilities Fiat 80 B Consumer Discretionary Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena Group CDP 2010 Italy 60 - CDLI and CPLI 79 B Financials Italcementi 78 B Materials Saipem 76 C Energy ACEA SpA 74 B Utilities Telecom Italia 70 B Telecommunication Services Generali 69 C Financials Unicredit Group 67 C Financials Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A 66 B Financials Finmeccanica 64 C Industrials Hera 63 C Utilities Atlantia 53 B Industrials Snam Rete Gas 52 C Utilities Edison 45 - Utilities UBI Banca 43 - Financials Lottomatica 38 - Consumer Discretionary ENEL SpA 37 - Utilities Autogrill Spa 29 - Consumer Discretionary Note: companies highligthed in bold belong to the CDLI, while the one company highlighted in green belongs both to the CDLI and CPLI. 15

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 Contents CDP Members and Signatories Foreword from Paul Dickinson, Chief Executive Officer Carbon Disclosure Project Message from the CDP Italy Report Partner, PwC Executive summary 1 The Italian context 2 Analysis of responses 3 The 2010 Carbon Disclosure Scores 4 The 2010 Carbon Performance Scores 5 Governance, Strategy and Emissions 6 Risks and Opportunities 7 Industry Perspectives: Sector Snapshots 8 Global key trends summary Appendix - Table of emissions, scores and sector information by company 16

1 The Italian Context (Corrado Clini - Director General, Ministry for the Environment and Territory and Sea, Italy) Italy towards Kyoto commitment and 2020 targets Figure 6 Italy national emissions (million t CO 2 -e) In 2009-2010 Italy stabilized the emissions at the 1990 level, and in the year 2012 the emissions will be in compliance with the Kyoto target. 590 570 2005 573 Mton +17,5% 2007 552 Mton +13,5% 550 The emissions reduction trend 2007-2012 is the combined effect of the national policies for improving the low carbon intensity of the Italian economy, as well as of the deep recession triggered by the global crisis. On the one side, the continuous trend in decoupling growth and 530 510 490 470 1990 516 Mton +6,5% 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2009 493 Mton +3% 2008 2008 541 Mton +12,2% 483 Mton Target Kyoto Figure 7 Italy energy consumption/energy intensity 240.0 258.4 240.0 220.0 MegaTEP/Million 200.0 180.0 196.1 183.1 160.0 166.5 140.0 120.0 1970-1983 % change: -21,1% CAGR*: -1,6% 1983-2000 % change: -6,6% CAGR: -0,4% 2000-2005 % change: 2,5% CAGR: 0,5% 2005-2020 (BAU) % change: -11,8% CAGR: -0,84% 100.0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Italian energy intensity Business As Usual (BAU) scenario * Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) 17

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 emission levels shows that the measures adopted after the Kyoto Protocol ratification have had a significant effect. On the other side, the recession is effective in changing the energy production and consumption systems, in improving the efficiency in the industrial processes, in promoting the phase out of the costly and high energy intensive processes. Today, Italy s carbon intensity is one of the lowest in the OECD countries, and it is the key driver of the National policies for addressing the Kyoto commitment and the 2020 targets. Nevertheless, in the commitment period 2008-2012 a gap of about 20-25 Mt CO 2 proportional to the Kyoto objective is still present. The industrial sector included in the Emissions Trading System (ETS) will meet the obligations under the Kyoto Protocol, while the non ETS sectors will face a gap, mostly because of the emissions from the transportation sector. The delay in the implementation of the Italian policies and programs, already adopted for the development of the infrastructures for the sustainable mobility of people and goods, is the most important barrier towards the compliance of Italy with the Kyoto Protocol. Looking at 2020 targets, the industrial sector will face the challenge of the improvement of energy efficiency as well as of the use of renewables in the production processes. The challenge will require innovation in the carbon management and in the technology investment strategies of the industrial sector. Figure 8 Italy national gap between emissions ETS and targets ETS 2008-2012 (million t CO 2 -e) 300 308-27 281 250 200 184 +17,6 201,6 150 100 50 0 Emissions ETS Target ETS Emissions non ETS Target non ETS Figure 9 Italy national ETS emissions and ETS targets (million t CO 2 -e) 210 200 190 180 170 160 18 150 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

1 The Italian Context To this end, the Italian Government is in the process of identifying and designing the best costeffectiveness measures in order both to support the innovation and competitiveness of the industrial sector, in the framework of the national climate change strategy up to 2020. The measures will be directed towards a substantial long term perspective, in order to link the short term (2020) actions with the options to address the objective of achieving deep cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions to limit the increase of mean global temperatures at most to 2 C above pre-industrial levels. To meet the 2 C objective, according to the BLUE Map scenario in 2010 ENERGY TECHNOLOGY PERSPECTIVES (IEA ETP) the following tasks need to be done: global greenhouse gas emissions should peak by around 2020 and decline steadily towards the 50 per cent cut in carbon emissions by 2050; the investments (public and private) in clean technologies should rise from the present $165bn a year, to $750bn in 2030 and $1.6 trillion in 2050; renewables should account for 48% of power generation, nuclear 24% and plants equipped with carbon capture and storage 17%; the widespread use of nextgeneration of biofuels should replace gasoline and diesel; a huge improvement in energy efficiency should reduce the energy demand growing by just 32%, compared with 84 % under the BAU; the widespread introduction of electric, hybrid or fuel cells cars should account for at least 80% of all vehicles on the road; stable, long-term incentives such as feed-in tariffs, loan guarantees and tax credits must be introduced to encourage the adoption of low-carbon technologies, while market barriers such as planning obstacles, building codes and red tape must be cut. The 2050 perspective should be the framework for the strategies of the Italian government to encourage and increase the economy s ability to deliver low carbon green growth the investments of the private sector. In this context the Carbon Disclosure Project could be a partner both of the Government and the Italian private sector, for facilitating the dialogue and the joint research of the best solutions for using the short term obligations under the Kyoto Protocol and the 2020 package as an opportunity for the innovation and the competitiveness of the Italian economy in the global race of the decarbonization. 19

2 Analysis of responses 2.1 The Global Response Out of the 4700 companies worldwide which were asked to respond to the CDP 2010 questionnaire, 3050 did answer, so the overall response rate to the Investor CDP Program 2010 turned out to be 65%. The response rate for the different geographic and industry samples ranged from 84% for the Europe 300 to 8% for the Russia 50. The Italy 60 response rate was surpassed this year by 21 geographic and sectorial samples (out of thirtythree) including also all European countries, apart from France and Portugal, whose samples size has however doubled this year. The Italy 40 2009 response rate ranked 24th. Figure 10 Response rate by geography - comparison between CDP 2010 and CDP 2009 Europe 300 US Bonds 180 Global 500 South Africa 100 FTSE All - World 800 Brazil 80 Australia 100 US S&P 500 FTSE 350* Netherlands 50 Nordic 200 Germany 200 Switzerland 100 Latin America 50 Ireland 40* Global Electric Utilities New Zealand 50 Canada 200 Korea 200* Japan 500 Spain 85 Italy 60 Asia ex - JICK 135* Portugal 40* France 250* Emerging Markets 800 Global Transport 100 Turkey 50 Australia 200 ex 100 India 200 Central & Eastern Europe China 100 Russia 50 12 8 11 10 8 13 21 18 24 22 29 25 74 68 74 72 73 73 70 70 66 69 67 66 62 65 65 61 51 58 56 54 50 50 33 48 49 46 52 46 49 42 50 41 37 40 41 35 35 32 31 30 38 30 58 31 67 84 82 82 82 81 * the size of samples changed from 2009. In 2009, samples were: UK FTSE 350, Ireland 45; Korea 100; Asia ex - JICK 100; Portugal 20; France 120 20 04 20 08 60 0 100

2 Analysis of responses 2.2 The local response The CDP 2010 Italy 60 response rate is 35%, corresponding to 21 respondents, the same performance as CDP 2009 but out of a greater number of companies invited, 60 instead of 40 in CDP 2009, suggesting that largecap Italian companies not only continued to engage with and support the CDP s questionnaire process, but, albeit from a quite low starting point, the overall number of respondents increased. Reasons for non-participation were generally linked to difficulties in responding to all the questionnaires received for ethycal indices, or for reporting obligations, such as EU ETS. Figure 11 3 5 12 3 13 Composition of Italy 60 by number of companies per sector (%) 37 17 3 7 Consumer Discretionary Consumer staples Energy Financials Health Care Industrials Materials Telecommunication Services Utilities Composition of Italy 60 respondents by number of companies by sector (%) These results suggest that in the context of resource constraints driven by the global financial crisis, larger companies in general placed a higher priority on completion of the CDP s information request this year, while smaller companies still placed a lower priority on responding. 33 14 9 Consumer Discretionary Energy Financials Industrials Materials Telecommunication Services In the Italy 60 sample for CDP 2010, which includes companies from different industry sectors identified using the Global Industry Classification Standards (GICS), the most represented sector is the Financials sector including 22 companies, followed by Consumer Discretionary, with 10 companies, and Utilities, with 8 companies. Of these three sectors, which together account for two thirds of the companies in the Italian sample, the Utilities sector featured the greatest response rate, 88%, while the Financials sector, with 23%, featured the lowest response rate (Figure 12). The Information Technology sector is not represented in the Italy 60 5 5 10 24 Utilities 21

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 sample, and no company from the Consumer Staples and Health Care sectors has responded to the questionnaire. Figure 12 Italy 60 response rate by industry sector (%) Utilities 88 12 Telecommunication Services 50 50 Materials 33 67 Industrials 29 71 Health Care 100 Financials 23 77 Energy 50 50 Consumer Staples 100 Consumer Discretionary 30 70 Total 2010 35 3 62 Total 2009 36 10 44 10 04 20 08 60 0 100 AQ - Answered questionnarie NR - No response DP - Declined to participate AQnp - Answered questionnaire, not public access Number in brackets indicates total number of companies in the sector. Figure 13 Composition of Italy 60 and respondents by market capitalisation (%) Italy 60 Respondents 4 17 10 1 22 5 26 6 1 1 21 5 5 39 37 Consumer Discretionary Financials Materials Consumer staples Health Care Telecommunication Services 22 Energy Industrials Utilities