How Cambridge MC implemented effective leadership direction for ELIXIR

Authors

What are Nature-based Solutions? Nature-Based Solutions can deliver multiple benefits in single locations, delivering greater impact for people, planet, and profit, and moving ESG from being just another cost to a competitive advantage. Today in the ESG space companies are expected to measure and manage their greenhouse gas emissions and water consumption, impacts on biodiversity, air, and water quality, and how their activities affect not only their staff but the communities they operate within. As a result, many companies now measure their impacts, and some employ companies to mitigate or offset their residual effects; however, this outsourcing approach is often costly and inefficient; with each residual effect mitigated or offset separately, uncertainty about the delivery or impact of the work, and delivery in other regions of the world meaning wider benefits are missed. The Business Case for Nature-based Solutions These costs and inefficiencies can be overcome however by mitigating and offsetting multiple residual effects at once by delivering Nature-Based Solutions on company land and buildings, or within the communities they serve. For example, creation or restoration of local grasslands, woodlands or wetlands would deliver carbon and biodiversity credits, water nutrient and air quality improvements, and reduced flood, drought, and wildfire risks in the areas where your company operates and your staff and customers live. Delivering these multiple impacts removes the costs of awarding and managing multiple contracts with different companies, whilst the schemes localness provides certainty of delivery and impact, and wider benefits including new local partnerships, provision of accessible natural greenspace improving staff and community health and wellbeing, and an enhanced corporate image and reputation. With ESG moving rapidly to the top of the social and political agenda the breadth and depth of ESG related disclosures that are required will only grow, so now is the best time to consider how you can deliver these more efficiently and impactfully through Nature-Based Solutions, positioning yourselves as a market leader and making this a key strand of your competitive advantage. Key Steps your Businesses should Take: Step 1: Evaluation of the measurement and management of environmental and social impacts Review of strategies, targets, costs, and impacts of existing approaches to measuring, addressing, and reporting on environmental and social impacts, including gathering stakeholder insights, and reviewing available resources, capabilities, assets, to identify where Nature-Based Solutions could be delivered. Step 2: Exploration of Nature-Based Solution delivery options Identification and assessment of Nature-Based Solution locations that deliver against company needs, including delivery and maintenance costs, partnership opportunities and appetite, and the potential for additional company benefits. Step 3: Delivery of Nature-Based Solutions Engage ESG team, local community, partners and contractors in detailed design and delivery of Nature-Based Solutions, develop and implement maintenance, monitoring, and governance protocols, collate and communicate lessons learnt, celebrate successes. How We can Help edenseven is the sustainability-focused sister-consultancy of Cambridge MC with an award-winning track record of helping businesses design and deliver data-driven sustainability strategies. With experts covering a wide range of sustainability subjects, from biodiversity & nature-based solutions, to electric vehicle fleet solutions, power purchase agreements (PPA), low carbon technologies, building optimisation, supply chain management, and end-to-end business transformation, we have experienced experts ready to help with any of your sustainability needs. With over 15 years' delivering nature-based solutions, Adam’s experience cuts across the public, private and third sectors having delivered time and again place-based solutions that increase profit whilst benefiting people and planet; the triple bottom line. Please get in touch below to find out more.

"Is it Snowing in Space?!" “Is it snowing in space?!” Asks a disgruntled Bill Murray in the film Groundhog Day when he is told that he cannot call out from the snowbound town of Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania. If there is a remake, Bill might not have to worry: signal dead zones may soon be a thing of the past due to recent advancements in satellite technology. Whereas the old picture of satellite communications was a scientist in the wilderness with a big clunky antenna, these days the technological payload is all in space. Recent advancements such as Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites, advanced beamforming, and the use of mobile spectrum bands means that any phone supporting 4G LTE can potentially receive satellite data directly. This integration of satellite and terrestrial networks is set to reshape the mobile industry, creating both opportunities and challenges for traditional mobile network operators (MNOs) and mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs). In this article we give an overview of the technological advancements, the major players in the market, and then consider the effects this will have on traditional wholesale mobile market structures; concluding with the emerging opportunities for new revenue and growth. The Evolution of Satellite Connectivity Historically, satellite communications operated independently from terrestrial networks, serving specialised markets with limited scalability and high entry barriers. However, recent advancements, particularly in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite technology, have dramatically altered this scenario. The most well-known example is obviously SpaceX, which has played a pivotal role in democratising space: reducing barriers to entry and making satellite connectivity more scalable, performant, and accessible. SpaceX and other companies have found innovative ways to dramatically reduce costs. Since Sputnik 1 in 1957, launching payloads into space has been prohibitively expensive, with costs exceeding $100,000 per kilogram in the 1960s and averaging $16,000/kg for heavy payloads from 1970 to 2010. SpaceX’s innovations have brought these costs down through reusable rockets, vertical integration, economies of scale, and advancements in materials and manufacturing processes: leading to price points as low as $100 per kilogram in recent years. However, cost is just one of the barriers. The real gambit has been provided by Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites, which typically orbit at altitudes ranging from approximately 160 to 2,000 km and offer low-latency, high-speed connectivity — making them ideal for real-time applications and direct-to-device communications. The latest generation of technologies now enable LTE mobile phones to connect directly to satellites without specialised hardware, marking a significant milestone in mobile communications. The Major Satellite-to-Cell Players While SpaceX's Starlink has garnered the most attention, several other major companies are actively developing satellite-to-cell technologies and forming strategic partnerships with terrestrial mobile operators. As of April 2024, Starlink had established 15 partnerships with mobile carriers globally — including T-Mobile in the US. T-Mobile has structured its beta program to begin with text messaging capabilities, gradually expanding to include picture messages, data connectivity, and eventually voice calls. As of February 2025, it is reported that 7,086 Starlink satellites are in orbit, with 7,052 being operational. AST SpaceMobile has emerged as a significant innovator, achieving a historic milestone in April 2023 with the first-ever two-way voice call directly with an unmodified smartphone, via their BlueWalker 3 satellite. AST SpaceMobile launched its first five commercial satellites, the BlueBird 1-5 mission, on September 12, 2024, aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. Lynk Global represents another significant player. In a recent expense report, it revealed that each satellite costs around $400,000 to build and up to $815,000 to launch into space. They hope to have up to 1000 satellites (for full continuous broadband coverage) in orbit by 2025 and 32 mobile network operator (MNO) partnerships by the end of 2025. The company has successfully demonstrated text messaging capabilities from satellites to standard cellular devices and continues to expand its constellation and service offerings. Huawei has partnered with China Telecom to demonstrate satellite-to-phone messaging capabilities, while Apple has worked with Globalstar to implement emergency satellite messaging features in recent iPhone models. Implications for Traditional Wholesale Mobile Market Structures Traditionally, the wholesale mobile market has been structured around MNOs, MVNOs, and wholesale aggregators. Revenue streams have typically included MVNO wholesale pricing, and IoT and machine-to-machine (M2M) solutions. However, the rise of satellite-to-cell technology poses potential threats to this established model. Disintermediation of MNOs and MVNOs Satellite-to-cell connectivity introduces the potential for disintermediation, where control traditionally held by MNOs could become fragmented across multiple parties in the value chain. As satellite providers increasingly offer direct-to-device services, traditional operators risk losing their central role in network management and customer relationships. Pricing Pressure on Wholesale Markets The increased availability and competition from satellite connectivity providers could exert downward pressure on wholesale pricing. As satellite services become more affordable and accessible, traditional wholesale providers may face challenges in maintaining their pricing structures and profitability. Competitive Pressure in IoT and Enterprise Applications Satellite connectivity is particularly well-suited for IoT and enterprise applications, especially in remote or challenging environments. As satellite-to-cell technology matures, traditional wholesale providers may face intensified competition in these segments, necessitating strategic adjustments to remain competitive. Emerging Opportunities in Satellite-to-Cell Connectivity Despite these challenges, the integration of satellite connectivity into mobile networks also presents substantial opportunities for innovation and growth. Forward-thinking operators can leverage satellite-to-cell technology to develop new business models and revenue streams. Hybrid Terrestrial-Satellite Subscription Models Providing Ubiquitous Connectivity Operators can offer hybrid subscription plans that seamlessly integrate terrestrial and satellite connectivity. Such models provide customers with uninterrupted coverage, enhancing user experience and creating differentiated service offerings. Wholesale Satellite Resale for MVNOs Satellite-to-cell technology opens new avenues for MVNOs to expand their service portfolios. By reselling satellite connectivity, MVNOs can offer enhanced coverage and reliability, particularly in underserved or remote regions, thereby attracting new customer segments. IoT and Enterprise-Focused Applications Satellite connectivity is a natural fit for IoT and enterprise applications, such as remote monitoring, asset tracking, and industrial automation. Mobile operators can forge strategic partnerships with satellite providers to deliver specialised solutions for these markets, tapping into new revenue opportunities. Emergency-Only and Disaster Recovery Plans Satellite-to-cell technology can play a crucial role in emergency and disaster recovery scenarios, providing a reliable backup to terrestrial networks when they are unavailable or overwhelmed. Operators can develop emergency-only plans that leverage satellite connectivity to ensure critical communications during crises. Conclusion Satellite-to-cell technology represents a convergence of space and terrestrial communications systems that promises to fundamentally alter global connectivity markets and players. The dramatic reduction in launch costs by a factor of 20 has enabled the deployment of massive satellite constellations that were previously economically unfeasible. The competitive landscape continues to evolve rapidly, with SpaceX, AST SpaceMobile, and Lynk, and traditional telecommunications companies all pursuing various technological approaches and business models. Commercial text messaging services are already becoming available through beta programs, with video calling capabilities demonstrated and voice calls progressing toward wider availability. The integration of 5G standards with satellite networks continues to advance through collaborative industry initiatives, with projections of a $50 billion market by 2032. As this technology continues to mature throughout 2025 and beyond, it promises to eliminate mobile dead zones and create new application possibilities that were previously unimaginable. The future of mobile communications is undoubtably hybrid: blending terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks into seamless connectivity solutions that follow users wherever they go. This has wide reaching implications for connectivity in remote and isolated regions, and offers perhaps the fastest and most cost-efficient route to bridging the digital divide. It will also transform how we respond in disaster zones and hazardous areas — increasing the ability to protect and save lives with faster and safer humanitarian and emergency services.

What Problem do Too Many SaaS Providers Have in Common? Many SaaS security providers have a history of treating important safety and security features as something to upsell. This raises the important question of whether a software vendor has a moral responsibility for the secure operation of their solution. In this article, we explore the implications of treating important security and safety features as an upsell, using Boeing as a test case of where this can go wrong. The Case of Boeing and the Aviation Industry The case against Boeing is emblematic of a more systemic issue across the aviation industry, and many other industries. The public became aware of this issue under tragic circumstances when the Lion Air and Ethiopian Air Boeing 737 Max airliners crashed in 2018 and 2019 respectively. According to the widely quoted New York Times article , the crash could have been avoided if the pilots had access to two safety features that were sold by Boeing as optional extras. According to the incident reports, at the root of the incident were the angle-of-attack sensors. These mechanical sensors operate in a similar fashion to a weathervane to measure whether the aircraft’s nose is pointing above or below the direction of airflow. Being mechanical, they may be prone to malfunction, perhaps jamming after having been installed incorrectly — as was believed to be the case for the Lion Air aircraft . The system that led to the aircraft’s demise, which identifies the risk of the aircraft stalling, only listened to one of the sensors. A difference in the signal being sent by the two sensors was not recognised by the anti-stall system; and the instruments that would have alerted the pilots to the conflicting signals were upsell items. This wasn’t a fancy, nice-to-have bell or whistle that makes the flight more comfortable, efficient, or profitable. It is an underlying safety feature of the aircraft. If there was no safety requirement for the redundancy of two sensors, it is difficult to see why there would ever be more than one. Boeing has now addressed the issue, and the anti-stall system listens to both sensors, responding safely in the event of conflicting signals. It should also be noted that the investigation identified pilot error and deficiencies in the training that contributed to the disasters (and this will be relevant to our points regarding many SaaS product decisions as well). The SaaS Parallels Cloud-delivered Software as a Service (SaaS) has revolutionised the tech industry, and catalysed a phenomenal level of innovation and growth. It has enabled new software capabilities to be brought to market faster than ever before, and facilitated the ability to reach a scale with costs defrayed across multiple customers that would have been unimaginable 30 years ago. However, the benefits of being able to access a service from anywhere, at any time, by anyone also presents significant risks. The ‘anyone’ can be a malicious party operating outside of the reach of law enforcement or extradition. As a result, there are clear commercial responsibilities placed on SaaS providers to secure their infrastructure from attack, and those that do not are unlikely to last long in the marketplace. But just like the aviation industry, there are different flavours of security, and different perceptions of what is considered essential. Taking due care and applying due diligence to ensure that the platform itself is adequately secured from a direct attack is clearly the vendor’s responsibility – but what about those elements of security that relate to risk owned by their customers? One key element of customer risk relates to the security of a user’s password. It is their responsibility to make sure they choose a long and random string drawn from upper case, lower case, numerical, and special characters (if allowed). It is also their responsibility to ensure that they do not ever use the same password for multiple applications or services. But, we know that compromised credentials is a common failure mode. Just because it is the user’s responsibility to mitigate this risk, this doesn’t mean that system developers do not also have some mutual responsibility to make it easier for the user to exercise that responsibility; controls have been developed specifically for that purpose. The most obvious ones are Multi Factor Authentication (MFA, or 2FA), and Single Sign On (SSO). With MFA, we improve the security of the credentials by also verifying that the user is in possession of their trusted device before we trust them at sign in. With SSO, we minimise the number of credentials and accounts to manage by federating with a single corporate account; we can then concentrate our effort to secure that corporate account rather than spreading our resources thinly. Both are relatively easily implemented these days, particularly in the case of SSO where the OAuth protocols are widely offered by Identity Providers. Once implemented, both are essentially free to operate, particularly if MFA uses an Authenticator app rather than SMS text messages. SaaS providers recognise that this security is important, and they will frequently implement MFA and SSO controls into their applications to meet that customer demand. But, too frequently, we see them only offered as part of the more expensive subscription options. This element of security is not enhancing the vendor’s core proposition; it is not making their offering more functional, better looking, or more efficient for their users. It is just making it more secure, and therefore to treat it as an item to upsell comes across as price-gouging rather than the responsible application of good security practice. It is almost as though these vendors have run out of innovative bells and whistles that their clients would value in their core product, so they have had to resort to undermining the security of their cheaper options in order to encourage their customers to pay for their more expensive ones. It is equivalent to a bank only using the CSC code on a card to secure transactions for customers who pay for their premium banking services, because, after all, it is the customer’s responsibility to protect their card details. Conclusion What we have described here is not universal, and probably is not even representative of the majority of SaaS providers. But, when you are reviewing a new service, we urge you to take a closer look at what security your provider is charging extra for. If low cost, high value security controls are being upsold, then you may want to consider what other security good practices are not being considered essential. For more information about our cyber security consulting services and Secure by Design principles in action, please contact Tom Burton, Partner for Cyber Security, using the form below.

As the UK's ageing copper landline network becomes increasingly unstable, Cambridge Management Consulting reports that BT is urging Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) providers to expedite their transition from analogue to digital voice. With the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) nearing the end of its life, organisations face significant risks if they delay planning and execution for this essential upgrade. Recent data indicates that 60% of CNI providers in the UK still lack a strategic plan to migrate from the legacy analogue network. This statistic underscores an urgent need for action to safeguard essential public services, such as healthcare, water, energy, emergency services, and government operations. The transition is not merely a technological upgrade; it is a once-in-a-generation programme to future-proof communications and improve service reliability. The PSTN, our communications backbone for over a century, is becoming increasingly prone to faults and difficult to maintain, with recent reports showing a 45% increase in significant resilience incidents. The impact of this transition is wide-reaching, affecting critical systems such as telemetry monitoring sensors, emergency phone lines, telecare alarms in hospitals and care homes, CCTV, intruder and fire alarms and older EPOS machines.  As the below graphic shows, a broad spectrum of devices and services will be affected by the analogue switch off, including ISDN, ASDL and Fibre to the Cabinet (FTTC) broadband services. The majority of organisations are almost certainly in the dark when it comes to common knowledge of all of the devices affected, lacking the internal expertise and records to identify and audit complex, interrelated legacy systems.

Well Intended Guidance Leaves more Questions than Answers The UK Government Digital Services – part of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology – has recently published guidance for how the public sector should adopt a multi-region approach to cloud technology. At first sight this appears encouraging. Any unnecessary constraints on hosting arrangements (or any other non-functional requirements) reduce the available market of providers, constrain competition, and therefore inevitably reduce value for money. If parts of Government, whether central, regional or local, have felt that everything must be hosted in the UK then it makes sense to produce guidance that clarifies this perception and helps to open their options up. But for guidance to be useful it should guide. It should make it easier for people to take actions that they previously would have discounted. The guidance in this case, which at 1420 words is almost as short as this article, probably leaves the reader with more questions than answers. It may reveal some unknowns, but without increasing certainty. The Guidance in a Nutshell A summary of the guidance is as follows: Look wider than UK: Many cloud solutions may not offer UK hosting, particularly new innovative solutions that haven’t scaled up yet. Irrespective, their staff are likely to be distributed around the world if the service is supported 24/7. There may also be other benefits in looking wider than UK hosting, such as enabling better business continuity and disaster recovery options if the vendor only has one UK site. Get legal advice: Before you even consider a non-UK option you need to seek advice from your own legal advisors and your Data Protection Officer (DPO). Ensure compliance with ICO guidance: Before you even consider a non-UK option you need to check and make sure that any international transfer of personal data will be compliant with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) guidance, and you should get further guidance from your own legal advice and DPO. Do a full review of vendor security: Before you even consider a non-UK option you need to make sure the vendor and solution are compliant with your own security policies. In a nutshell, it says: 'you should consider options outside of the UK but only if you have checked everything is legal and secure'. This seems to be verging on a statement of the obvious; the real difficulty in going offshore is covering all of the legal, regulatory and security compliance aspects. Adequacy is a Moment in Time On point 3, the guidance points out data protection compliance is easier if the country in question is considered by the ICO to be adequate – having equivalent regulations for data protection to the UK. Sound advice. But even this is not that simple. For instance, the USA is not considered adequate unless it is under an extension of the EU-US Data Privacy Framework. This framework is dependent on an Executive Order that the Biden administration put in place, and it is entirely possible that it will be revoked by the current administration. If such an action was taken, or if for any other reason the EU decides that adequacy is no longer met (also not unlikely given Herr Schrems has achieved this twice already and has stated he plans to challenge the DPF), then the vendor will no longer be considered compliant. Consideration is Far Wider than Residency Security is far wider than data residency though. This is where point 4 both states the obvious and understates the complexity. Managing risk in the supply chain is inherently difficult. Cloud providers, and particularly SaaS solutions, aggravate this challenge by an order of magnitude. By their nature they are solutions designed for a broad and varied range of customers. This means they will always involve compromise. If they tried to meet the most demanding requirements, they would price themselves out of the scale marketplace. If they went for the lowest common denominator, they would be unable to meet the requirements of the majority. An individual customer can rarely dictate a specific security requirement for themselves. They are also highly opaque. The vendor presents their service as a black box. The features delivered to the customer are defined, but much of the underlying design and the means the vendor uses to manage it in operation are hidden. This makes assessing the risk far more of a judgement call than when the design and delivery is conducted under your control. Depending on the supplier, and the leverage that the customer has over them, it may be possible to get some information and assurances; but the right questions need to be asked, and the answers need to be interpreted correctly. Third party certifications and audits, such as the ISO27000 series of standards or the SOC1, SOC2 and SOC3 reports, can also provide some additional assurances. But only the customer will be able to decide the extent to which they can mitigate the risk, and the confidence they have in the supplier to manage their own. This is a business decision informed by the specifics and nuances of the risks being considered. Summary It is important to minimise the non-functional requirements and keep an open mind about potential solutions and vendors. This includes looking wider than just the UK when national security requirements are not paramount. But this is not something that can be distilled onto a single sheet of A4 in any meaningful way. Yes, there are legal and regulatory issues that need to be reviewed. And geopolitical risk needs to be factored in, considering how you would respond to future external changes that are outside of the UK’s control. But from experience, the greatest challenge is getting comfortable that the vendor’s organisation and their solution have adequate security – this applies equally whether the solution is hosted in the UK or overseas. The SaaS world is opaque, and balances priorities across a broad and varied customer base. The public sector needs to increase its adoption of cloud and SaaS solutions to remain efficient and relevant, in the same way that the private sector has had to. But the route to responsible adoption is more nuanced, requiring candid conversations with suppliers, and ultimately an informed but subjective judgement by the customer’s leadership. Sources/Links: DSIT Guidance for Multi-region cloud and software-as-a-service ↩︎ ICO Guide to International Transfers ↩︎ Executive Order (E.O.)14086 of October 7, 2022, on Enhancing Safeguards for United States Signals Intelligence Activities ↩︎ Note: This article originally appeared on Tom Burton's personal blog at https://digility.net/insights/

The Digital Communities All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) shared the ‘Care to connect: Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) Migration’ report with key parliamentarians on Monday at a launch meeting on Parliament Street. This report highlights key recommendations for managing the ongoing Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) migration, focusing on protecting vulnerable residents and ensuring effective solutions. Here are the major takeaways for local government and communication providers: Data-Sharing Agreements (DSAs) DSAs between communication providers (CPs), local authorities, and telecare providers are crucial for identifying vulnerable residents during the migration. Challenges include inconsistent responses from local authorities and fragmented approaches across CPs. The APPG recommends all local authorities and housing associations sign DSAs, regardless of progress in digital switchover, to promote uniformity and resident safety. Telecare Devices The sale of analogue telecare devices must end, as these can leave residents unsupported during the transition. The government, in collaboration with the TEC Services Association (TSA), should enforce higher standards (TEC Quality’s Quality Standards Framework) across the telecare industry to achieve robust digital migration practices. Financial support for local councils is critical to replace outdated telecare devices and prevent double costs. Battery Backup Solutions Existing guidance from Ofcom, requiring one-hour resilience for power cuts, is insufficient. The APPG recommends increasing power backup requirements to at least 4 hours in homes and 6 hours for fixed networks. Communication and energy providers must jointly create resilient power solutions, particularly for vulnerable residents reliant on telecare devices. A multi-sector priority service register should integrate communications and energy service protection for those at risk. Sunset of 2G and 3G Networks UK mobile network operators plan to stop supporting 2G and 3G networks by 2033, with some networks already switched off. There are cases where local authorities and residents have purchased telecare devices using 2G/3G SIM cards, as a lower-cost, interim solution — these devices will need to be replaced again, posing double replacement costs for local authorities and additional risks to residents. The government should stop the sale of analogue devices and accelerate efforts to prevent the redeployment of outdated telecare alarms. Summary We welcome these recommendations alongside the December 2023 PSTN Charter, the Telecare National Action Plan and the PSTN Non-voluntary Migration Checklist. The conclusions make it clear that coordination between local and central government, industry regulators (such as Ofcom and Ofgem), and communication providers (CPs), as well as significant investment in digital teams at a local level, are essential goals to ensure a safe and inclusive digital switchover for all vulnerable residents and telecare users. Read the full report here: https://digitalcommunities.inparliament.uk/care-to-connect-public-switch-telephone-network-migration-report About the APPG The Digital Communities APPG is a cross-party group of parliamentarians, with the aim to promote the delivery of digitally equipped places that support and foster a connected, healthy, and productive community. This includes the creation and maintenance of sustainable digital infrastructure, as well as providing residents with equal opportunity to thrive in a digital world. The LGA provides the secretariat to the APPG. Cambridge Management Consulting Our Public Sector and PSTN teams can help local councils and other public bodies by providing strategy, financial planning, procurement, and project management services to ensure that you have a comprehensive transition strategy and accurate financial costing for the PSTN switch-off. We can help you follow the recommendations in this report by completing a full audit, signing DSAs with CPs and most importantly, protecting vulnerable service users. Get in touch with Craig Cheney, Managing Partner and lead for Public & Education, to discuss a range of services which might suit your needs: ccheney@cambridgemc.com (or use the form below). Act now, before time and resources run out.

What Do Your Scope 3 Emissions Have to Do with Inflation? Scope 3 emissions cover everything outside your direct operations —the carbon footprint of your supply chain, purchased goods, logistics, business travel, and more. The higher your Scope 3 emissions, the more energy-intensive your supply chain is. And the more energy-intensive your supply chain, the more vulnerable you are to rising costs. Think of it this way: High Production Costs- If your suppliers are heavily dependent on fossil fuels, their production costs are rising fast Price Volatility- If your supply chain lacks efficiency and resilience, price volatility will hit you harder Locking in High Costs- If you’re not actively engaging with suppliers to reduce emissions, you’re locking in long-term cost increases that could have been avoided Without accurate Scope 3 data and a clear engagement strategy , businesses are leaving themselves open to higher prices, lower margins, and greater financial risk . Why Businesses Struggle with Scope 3 A major challenge is that Procurement and Sustainability teams often operate in silos: Procurement teams focus on cost and supplier relationships but often lack deep sustainability expertise Sustainability teams focus on compliance and decarbonisation but aren’t typically measured on financial performance This disconnect means emissions reduction is rarely treated as a financial opportunity —when in reality, cutting carbon from your supply chain is also one of the most effective ways to reduce exposure to cost inflation. The Businesses That Get This Right Will Lower their Costs Leading organisations are already taking action. They are: Gathering detailed Scope 3 emissions data to map out cost risks in their supply chain Engaging suppliers to drive efficiency, reduce emissions, and lower costs Building resilience by shifting towards lower-carbon, more cost-stable alternatives The result? Lower long-term costs, reduced financial risk, and a competitive edge over those stuck with inefficient supply chains. This is not just about sustainability compliance —it’s about smart financial decision-making. If You’re Not Taking Action, You’re Losing Money Every business will feel the impact of rising supply chain costs—but not every business will be prepared for them. If you don’t have accurate Scope 3 emissions data and an effective engagement strategy, you are: Paying more than you need to for essential goods and services Exposing your business to long-term cost inflation Missing out on opportunities to build a stronger, more resilient supply chain The sooner you act, the better the outcome for your bottom line and the planet. Is your business ready to take control of its costs? Get in touch with Cambridge Management Consulting and edenseven today. About edenseven edenseven is the sustainability-focussed sister-company of Cambridge Management Consulting. We work with businesses across all sectors in multiple regions to deliver robust and deliverable net-zero strategies. The success of any strategy relies on its awareness of how changes in policy and subsidies can create both risks and opportunities for a business. If you are a business trying to enter a new market or evolving in an existing market and would like to learn more about how edenseven can support you, please get in touch with the team at edenseven at info@edenseven.co.uk or use the contact form below. Find out more about edenseven on their website: edenseven.co.uk