# How Do German Manufacturers React to the Increasing Societal Pressure for Decarbonisation?
## 3 Results
### What Measures Do Companies Take to Tackle Their Carbon Footprint?
#### 3.2.3 If Considered, Which of the Three Aspects Has the Highest Priority?  
Half the companies follow the path of efficiency first, as an energy consumption reduction subsequently leads to a smaller carbon footprint. Resource consumption has the highest priority for a third of the companies, whereas the footprint itself is the leading factor in only 16% of the cases, perhaps as saving costs is the primary driver so far.  
Among micro companies (56%), the priority of energy consumption reduction is highest, whereas it is the lowest for small companies (45%). Resource consumption, however, plays a significant role in small companies (39%) and a much smaller one in large companies (26%)--possibly, as many small companies manufacture products with a higher likelihood of scrap and waste, whereas large(r) companies often \"just\" combine the specific parts they have ordered from their supply chain. As large companies are more visible and often--if also energy intensive--falling into the European emission trading system (EU ETS) [33], the share of companies prioritising the CO\({}_{2}\) footprint is highest in that group (21%), and, for the same, reason lowest for micro companies (9%) (cf. Figure 3a).  
For non-energy intensive companies, energy consumption has the highest priority (54%). This decreases with increasing **energy intensity** to 48%, whilst the priority of resource consumption increases with increasing energy intensity from 33% to 36%--for the more energy intensive companies it may be easier to reduce the amount of resources than the amount of energy needed for a new product, as significant reductions in energy demand would require a complete redesign of the way they are manufacturing their product, i.e., the transformation in the steel industry towards hydrogen instead of coke as agent. The priority of the carbon footprint is similarly low across intensities, deviating from 13% (not energy intensive) to 16% (moderately energy intensive), possibly as both energy and resource consumption directly impact on the CO\({}_{2}\) footprint and promise to reduce costs, whilst primarily looking at the footprint does not necessarily do so (e.g., switching to green energy) (cf. Figure 3b).  
In respect to **sectors**, energy consumption plays the biggest role, by far, in the \"glassware and ceramics\" and \"metal production and processing\" sectors (60%), and is least often regarded as the highest priority by the \"paper and paper products\" sector (32%), followed by the \"furniture\" sector (40%), where, in return, resource consumption (46/48%)  
Figure 3: (**a**) Energy and resource and footprint—which factor has highest priority, by company size; (**b**) energy and resource and footprint—which factor has highest priority, by energy intensity; and (**c**) energy and resource and footprint—which factor has highest priority, by sector.  
is most often of the highest relevance, and least often in the \"extraction of stone and earth\" sector (18%). All this is understandable due to the nature of the products manufactured in these sectors. The carbon footprint is by far most often named aspect of the highest relevance in the aforementioned sector (36%), followed by the \"chemical\" sector (23%)--possibly as both cannot do much about resource and energy consumption without a larger transformation--and least often in the \"glassware and ceramics\" and \"furniture\" sectors (8%), followed by the \"wood/wood products\" sector (10%) (cf. Figure 3c).