CensatimCENSATIMAll guides →

Information & Communication · EU Taxonomy Activity Guide

Data-driven solutions for GHG reduction under the EU Taxonomy

Software, IoT and data services can qualify under the Taxonomy where the solution is predominantly aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and that reduction is substantiated: demonstrated life-cycle GHG savings versus the best available alternative. For climate-tech and industrial software companies, alignment is achievable but evidence-led, and the evidence is a quantified emissions case, not a mission statement.

Activity ID
CCM 8.2
NACE code
J61 / J62 / J63.11
Objective
Climate change mitigation
Sector
Information and Communication
This is the software industry’s enabling activity: ICT solutions qualify where they are predominantly aimed at, and can demonstrate, GHG reductions elsewhere. The demonstration requirement is what separates aligned products from green-tinted marketing.
01

Why this activity matters

The Taxonomy’s ICT chapter recognises that much decarbonisation runs on software: energy management systems, smart grid and building controls, precision agriculture, logistics optimisation and industrial IoT all cut emissions in the activities they serve. Activity 8.2 gives that contribution a financeable definition, with a deliberately demanding demonstration requirement to keep the category honest.

For SaaS and ICT companies, the commercial stakes are fund classification and CSRD KPIs: an aligned product line lets an investor count the holding, and lets the company report aligned turnover. The recurring gap in assessments is the demonstration itself: solutions with credible, quantified customer-level emission savings (measured or modelled against the counterfactual, ideally verified) assess well; solutions with directional claims do not. Data centre operations underlying the service connect to the separate data centre activity.

02

What alignment requires

A purposive test with a quantified demonstration at its heart. In summary:

AreaWhat is required (summarised)
Predominant aimThe solution is predominantly aimed at the provision of data and analytics enabling GHG reductions, established by its function and marketing, not incidental side-effects.
Demonstrated savingsSubstantial life-cycle GHG savings are demonstrated versus the best performing alternative solution, using recognised methodology, with the solution’s own footprint (including hosting) netted in the comparison.
VerificationThe demonstration should be robust and, where available, independently reviewed; assessments weight verified customer-level evidence most heavily.

Summarised for orientation; the assessment itself applies the full criteria text of the Delegated Acts as amended.

03

Where DNSH scrutiny falls

Circular economy

Hardware elements (sensors, devices): durability and end-of-life handling under WEEE.

Pollution

Light for pure software; device manufacturing supply chains where hardware is bundled.

Climate adaptation

CRVA proportionate to the operation; service continuity for solutions their users depend on.

04

Documentation that typically supports the assessment

05

How Censatim assesses it

Our questioning goes straight to the demonstration: what the solution does, what the counterfactual is, how the savings were quantified and what the solution’s own footprint nets off. This is the activity where the gap between marketing and evidence is widest, and the assessment’s value is telling you precisely which side of that line your documentation currently sits.

Censatim is an expert-built EU Taxonomy assessment tool: describe the asset or activity in plain language, upload supporting documents, and answer a short set of targeted questions. The result is a criterion-by-criterion view with an In-line / Partial / Not aligned / Undetermined rating and a confidence level for each dimension. See the full methodology.

06

Frequently asked questions

Can software companies be EU Taxonomy aligned?

Yes, through activity 8.2, where the solution is predominantly aimed at enabling GHG reductions and substantial life-cycle savings are demonstrated versus the best available alternative. The quantified demonstration is the decisive evidence.

What counts as demonstrating GHG savings for software?

A quantified, methodologically recognised comparison against the counterfactual: measured customer deployments or robust modelling, netting off the solution’s own footprint including hosting. Directional claims without quantification do not meet the requirement.

Does the software’s own hosting footprint matter?

Yes, the life-cycle comparison nets the solution’s own emissions, including its hosting, against the savings it enables, which links this activity to the data centre criteria where the company operates its own infrastructure.

Is 8.2 an enabling activity?

Yes, explicitly: the qualification rests on emissions reduced in the activities the solution serves, making it the software counterpart to the low-carbon technology manufacturing activities.

Assess data-driven solutions for ghg reduction now

Free eligibility in under a minute. The sector and activity are pre-filled for you.

Asset assessment →Corporate reporting →