Climate action standards comparison

"Felipe, are there other options beyond #SBTi? Why don't I hear about other standards? I've been receiving this question frequently in conversations with my customers, so I thought it would be helpful to share some insights here. When it comes to driving corporate climate action, several initiatives provide frameworks and methodologies. Here’s a comparison of some key players in the field: "The leader" - Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi): - A collaboration of institutions aimed at increasing corporate ambition on climate action. - Methodology: Independent assessment of companies’ Scope 1, 2, 3 targets, classified into three categories. - Adoption: ~1,200 companies, including Bayer, thyssenkrupp, Saint-Gobain, and PSA. Transition Pathway Initiative (#TPI): - A global initiative led by asset owners and supported by asset managers. - Methodology: Assessment based on publicly available information and classification into five levels. - Adoption: ~370 companies, such as Tesla, P&G, and Ford. X-Degree Compatibility (#XDC): - A science-based climate metric to quantify a company’s contribution to global warming. - Methodology: Emission and economic data are used to calculate XDC value and emission reduction pathways. - Adoption: >30 companies, including BASF, Adidas, and E.ON. The 1.5°C Business Playbook: - An initiative that brings together technology innovators, scientists, companies, and NGOs. - Methodology: Proposed pathway based on the carbon law, which involves halving carbon emissions every decade. - Adoption: No calculation/categorization of companies. ISO Standard on Climate Action (e.g., ISO 14064-1): - Provides guidelines and standards for quantifying and reporting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and removals. - Methodology: Focuses on organizational and project-level GHG quantification, reporting, and verification. - Adoption: Widely recognized and adopted globally across various industries for standardized reporting and compliance. ------ Top 3 Key Differences: ------ 1- While SBTi, TPI, and XDC provide specific frameworks for setting and assessing climate targets, the 1.5°C Business Playbook offers a broader pathway approach, and ISO focuses on standardized reporting. 2- Methodology: SBTi and TPI rely on classifications, XDC uses a quantitative metric, the 1.5°C Business Playbook is based on the carbon law, and ISO provides guidelines for GHG quantification and reporting. 3- Adoption: SBTi and TPI have broader adoption among companies, while XDC and the 1.5°C Business Playbook have more specialized use cases. ISO standards are globally recognized and widely adopted across industries. Choosing the right framework depends on your organization's specific needs, whether it's setting science-based targets, aligning with asset managers, quantifying climate impact, following a broad decarbonization pathway, or adhering to standardized reporting. How is your organization navigating these frameworks in its sustainability journey?

Net zero is rife with confusion. So you'd be forgiven for thinking there's more noise than signal on what 'good net zero' actually looks like for the private sector. Competing standards often say slightly different things about core net zero aspects like #offsets, #carbonremovals and #transitionplans. But this obscures a simple fact: there's striking agreement on what good net zero looks like for companies across sectors. Launched to inform those at #COP29, our new 'Net Zero Good Practice' living document compares six standard-setting initiatives, highlighting areas of convergence on the what and how of net zero. It also unpacks what each initiative is actually saying. We explicitly cover the: - 'Integrity Matters' recommendations by the UN Expert Group on Net Zero - Corporate Net-Zero Standard by the Science Based Targets initiative - Race to Zero criteria by the High-Level Climate Champions - Net Zero Guidelines by ISO - International Organization for Standardization - Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor by NewClimate Institute - A landscape review of net zero standards by Oxford Net Zero Check it out and tell us what you think: https://lnkd.in/ezRedS8k What's good? What gaps would you like plugged? For the net zero nerds out there, under the hood is more comparative info on two other initiatives. Download the full data and see where the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB)'s Climate-related Disclosures and the World Benchmarking Alliance's Assessing Transition Plans Collective (ATP-Col) fit in. This has been more than a year in the making. Really proud of the Net Zero Tracker team, especially the unflappable Frederic Hans for driving this. Like usual, we worked closely with our extended team at Oxford: Alexis McGivern, Matilda Becker and Kaya Axelsson 🙏 Stay tuned as we add more domains over time, for example Adaptation, Nature and Resilience. Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit Data-Driven EnviroLab Georgina Beasley David Carlin David Hall Catherine Atkin Catherine McKenna Shana Gallagher Daniel Barlow

A new resource to clarify net-zero standards at COP 29! Reaching net zero is hard enough without all the competing definitions, initiatives, and frameworks! That's why I love this work from John Lang and the Net Zero Tracker team that compares and clarifies the most important net zero standards for private sector actors! They explore the differences and numerous commonalities across: - 'Integrity Matters' recommendations by the UN Expert Group on Net Zero - Corporate Net-Zero Standard by the Science Based Targets initiative - Race to Zero criteria by the High-Level Climate Champions - Net Zero Guidelines by ISO - International Organization for Standardization - Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor by NewClimate Institute - A landscape review of net zero standards by Oxford Net Zero You can see perspectives on transition plans, offsets, target-setting and more right here: https://lnkd.in/ezRedS8k #climate #netzero #cop29 #greenertogether #decarbonization #esg #sustainabilitystandards #un #climateaction #emissions #sustainability

Comparison of net-zero targets in global standards 🌎 In the journey to net-zero emissions, businesses encounter a range of frameworks that set benchmarks for credible climate commitments. A recent comparative analysis of major standards—including the UN High-Level Expert Group, ISO, Race to Zero, and SBTi—highlights five key dimensions critical to setting effective, science-aligned net-zero targets. Examining these points of convergence and divergence offers insight into building robust net-zero strategies. Emission Scope Coverage: Comprehensive frameworks require covering direct (Scope 1), indirect (Scope 2), and value chain emissions (Scope 3) alongside non-GHG climate effects, ensuring that significant emissions are included. Interim Targets and Milestones: Regular interim targets—often in 5-year intervals—are essential for tracking progress and aligning companies with long-term climate goals. These milestones foster accountability and support incremental reduction. 1.5°C-Aligned Reductions: To maintain credibility, frameworks mandate reductions in line with 1.5°C pathways. Minimum reduction requirements prioritize substantial action, limiting the overuse of offsets. Transition Plans for 1.5°C Alignment: Effective net-zero pledges include transition plans detailing near-term actions, fossil fuel phase-outs, and alignment of advocacy efforts with climate goals. This dimension emphasizes operational readiness for a low-carbon economy. Carbon Offsetting and Removals: Approaches to offsetting vary, with some frameworks allowing limited offsets only after reductions within the value chain. Where offsets are used, quality and integrity are prioritized. Adhering to these five dimensions promotes transparency and rigor in corporate climate commitments, aligning with the IPCC’s findings on the importance of deep emissions reductions to limit global warming to 1.5°C. This comparison was published last year, so some updates or changes may now apply to certain standards. However, it remains a valuable tool for businesses seeking to align their net-zero targets with established guidelines. Source: Net Zero Tracker #climate #netzero #decarbonization #sustainability #sustainable #business #esg #climatechange #climateaction