SBTi Standard 2.0: Has the Standard Finally Caught up with Reality?

If you’re in the world of climate change, carbon reduction target setting and implementation plans, you will be more than aware of the latest edition of the Science Based Targets initiative’s Standard: version 2.

It has been long in gestation, and while it doesn’t fully replace the existing standards until 1 February 2028, it is here and ready to be used from 1 February 2027.

There are many blogs on the ins and outs of the new Standard: what criteria have changed, and why, and how you can navigate the new world order. What I would like to dwell on here, though, is the motivation for the change. The preamble and explanation for why they have made a significant overhaul to a system that has been in place for ten years, evolved but still largely recognisable as the same as when it first appeared.

A love letter to validated companies?

The Foreword and Executive Summary are just this. If you lean back, it reads like a love letter to their validated client companies. Or even a confessional. It talks about commitment not being the hardest part, but delivery being so. There is a clear realisation that while organisations are keen to reduce their emissions, they have limited control and influence across what they do, value chain Scope 3 emissions in particular.

With many of the clients we have supported, the question comes up time and time again. “Scope 3 Category 1, purchased goods and services, is so huge; how are we ever going to reduce that?” Procurement is a wonderful tool for leveraging positive sustainability outcomes when done well, but it will always be restricted to what the market can offer and what it can afford.

This paragraph stands out in that sense.

We have also made an explicit choice to recognize that companies do not control everything, and that pretending otherwise does not serve anyone. The updated Standard is built on a best-efforts framework. The expectation is clear: Set targets based on science accompanied by reasonable implementation plans, deploy every lever within your control, be transparent about where barriers have limited what was possible, and demonstrate what you are doing to address those barriers over time.

Why this is welcome

This (newfound?) understanding is welcomed, and I suspect it will give more optimism to organisations looking to not only set but actually achieve a net zero target. The Foreword belatedly acknowledges what users of the SBTi have known for a long time: setting a science-based, Paris-aligned target is actually relatively easy to do. You follow the rules and criteria, as arcane and detailed as they are, in a Hansel and Gretel style, until you reach the End Zone of Validation (too many metaphors? Sorry!).

The real hard work then starts: submitting business cases for investment in low carbon solutions, and then bringing all your nudge theory and psychological tools online to implement them. Seeing an overt recognition that this takes time, and isn’t always in the protagonist’s gift, is a breath of fresh air.

Good luck!