In school, I take a class called AP Research. The goal of this class is to identify a gap in already existing research and see if you can plug that gap. As I have an interest in environmental policy, I focused on the reporting of scope 3 emissions and how the law can improve the process. Companies report emissions within 3 scopes: 1, 2, and 3. Scope 1 emissions are emissions that are emitted from objects directly owned by a company, so the emissions of a delivery truck would count as scope 1 emissions for that delivery company. Scope 2 emissions are the emissions produced from the day to day routine of a company. For example, heating, cooling and electricity emissions. Finally, scope 3 emissions are the emissions from an object that the company does not directly own or control, but they still use. Scope 3 emissions take up a majority of the emissions structure of a company, yet they are the most difficult to quantify. Because of this, many companies do not expend the resources necessary to compile the most accurate data, and end up under reporting their emissions. This is a problem because these emissions go into the atmosphere and contribute to the growing danger of climate change. In order to lessen the emissions that companies generate, there needs to be a greater understanding of just how much these companies are producing. I am researching solutions to this problem from a legal perspective. An idea that I have come across is integrated reporting. Integrated reporting is the combined reporting of both financial and social impact. Since scope 3 emissions fall under social reporting, if companies are forced to focus as much on their social reporting as they are on their financial reporting, the data that they release will be more accurate.