Targets adopted by companies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are considered “science-based” if they are in line with the level of decarbonization required to keep global temperature increase below 2°C compared to pre-industrial temperatures, as described in the Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). [Applies to the 4th or 5th AR of IPCC as well as modeling of the IEA.]
What is the Science Based Targets initiative?
The Science Based Targets initiative champions science-based target setting as a powerful way of boosting companies’ competitive advantage in the transition to the low-carbon economy. It is a collaboration between CDP, World Resources Institute (WRI), the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), and the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC). It is one of the We Mean Business Coalition commitments.
Showcases companies that set science-based targets through case studies, events and media to highlight the increased innovation, reduced regulatory uncertainty, strengthened investor confidence and improved profitability and competitiveness generated by science-based target setting.
Defines and promotes best practice in science-based target setting with the support of a Technical Advisory Group
Offers resources, workshops and guidance to reduce barriers to adoption
Independently assesses and approves companies’ targets
What are the objectives and deliverables of the initiative?
Science-based target setting will become standard practice and corporations will be contributing significantly to closing the emissions gap. The initiative develops guidance, tools, and technical assistance to facilitate the adoption of science-based targets and incentivise companies to set meaningful targets.
By 2020, at least 300 high-impact companies, representing at least 2 GT of emissions, will have science-based emission reduction targets in place.
By 2018, at least 300 high-impact companies, representing at least 2 GT of emissions, will have committed to adopt science-based GHG emission reduction targets and more than 100 of these companies will have approved science-based targets.
Science-based target setting will be embedded in key mechanisms and platforms that lead to the widespread and sustained adoption of GHG emission reduction targets in line with science as a standard business practice in priority regions and sectors.
In support of the Paris Agreement, science-based targets from leading companies demonstrate to policy-makers the scale of emission reductions that are achievable to positively influence international climate negotiations and domestic climate policy.
What are the benefits of setting a science based target?
Reducing GHG emissions protects our climate and our communities – and it’s also good for business. The transition to a low-carbon economy is underway and accelerating globally. Every sector in every market will be transformed. Get on track now for low-carbon and future-proof growth by setting a science-based target to:
1. Increase innovation.
The transition to a low-carbon economy will catalyze the development of new technologies and operational practices. The companies that set ambitious targets now will lead innovation and transformation tomorrow.
2. Reduce regulatory uncertainty.
Taking ambitious action now helps companies stay ahead of future policies and regulations to limit GHG emissions. Companies that are seen as leaders are better able to influence policy makers and help shape developing legislation.
3. Strengthen investor confidence and credibility.
Companies taking a leadership position on climate bolster their credibility and reputation among stakeholders, including investors, customers, employees, policy makers and environmental groups. Approximately half of consumers worldwide believe climate change will have a negative effect on their own lives, and 65 per cent agree that human activity is responsible for climate change.
4. Improve profitability and competitiveness.
Setting ambitious targets now ensures a lean, efficient, and durable company in a future where resources become increasingly more expensive – particularly resources derived from fossil fuels. Rising prices of raw materials can mean the difference between profit and loss.
What is the difference between the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) and Assessing low Carbon Transition (ACT)?
The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) is a collaboration between CDP, World Resources Institute (WRI), the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), and the United Nations Global Compact (UN Global Compact) and one of the We Mean Business Coalition commitments. It champions science-based target setting as a powerful way of boosting companies’ competitive advantage in the transition to the low-carbon economy. The initiative defines and promotes best practice in science-based target setting, offers resources and guidance to reduce barriers to their adoption, and independently assesses and approves companies’ targets.
ACT is a joint pilot project by the French Environmental Agency (Agence de l’Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l'Énergie, ADEME), CDP and other partners. ACT’s goal is to drive corporate climate action and help companies achieve a low carbon pathway, by assessing their strategy, taking a holistic view of a company’s operational impacts and dependencies, as well as of its value chain on relevant low carbon challenges per sector.
These two initiatives complement each other and are relevant at different stages in climate corporate action. By supporting companies in the process of setting science-based targets, the SBTi helps them define a clear sense of direction to be in line with a 2C decarbonization pathway. By supporting companies to achieve the low carbon transition and by monitoring their climate action, ACT helps them implement that direction, and enhance the credibility of their climate commitments.
I work for a consultancy firm to set science-based targets with clients. How can I engage with the initiative?
We appreciate your interest in the Science Based Targets initiative. Please contact us by sending an e-mail to [email protected] stating your interest and we will contact you as soon as possible.
I work for an industry organization interested in promoting science-based targets amongst our members. How can I engage with the SBT initiative?
We appreciate your interest in the Science Based Targets initiative. Please contact us by sending an e-mail to [email protected] stating your interest and we will contact you as soon as possible.
About the Science Based Targets initiative's Call to Action
How can companies join the Science Based Targets initiatives' Call to Action?
Companies can join the initiative and demonstrate their climate leadership by completing the following four steps:
Step 1. Commit.
Signing the Commitment Letter indicates that your company will work to set a science-based emission reduction target. If your company already has an emissions reduction target, the letter confirms your interest in joining the initiative and having your existing target independently verified against a set of science-based criteria. After submitting your commitment letter to [email protected], your company will be recognised as “Committed” on the website as well as on our partner websites.
Step 2. Develop a target.
Once your company has signed the commitment letter you will have up to 24 months to develop a science-based target. We encourage sustainability professionals to be in contact with the Science Based Targets initiative to informally test the target before securing final executive sign off.
Step 3. Submit your target for validation.
Once a target has been developed, your company must complete the Target Submission Form and submit it via email to [email protected] We highly recommend you review the Target Submission Form Guidance before completing the form. The Science Based Targets team will then verify the target against the SBTi criteria and inform you whether the target has been formally approved or if it needs additional work.
Step 4. Announce the target.
On confirmation that your target meets the SBTi criteria your company and its target will be showcased on the Science Based Targets initiative website as well as on our partner websites. For more information on each one of these steps, please refer to the Call to Action Guidelines.
What are the benefits of committing before submitting targets for validation?
By committing to set science-based targets before submitting targets for validation, companies are immediately recognized as “committed to setting a science-based target” at sciencebasedtargets.org, as well as at our partners’ websites at We Mean Business and CDP. In addition, committed companies are prioritized for feedback when their targets are submitted for validation in case they are not approved. In fact, the Science Based Target initiative provides them with more detailed guidance on how their targets can be improved.
Do I have to pay a fee to join the SBTi Call to Action?
At the moment The Science Based Targets initiative does not charge a fee to companies submitting a commitment letter or to companies submitting targets for a validation.
Who can join the SBTi Call to Action campaign?
At the moment, the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) focuses on promoting corporate climate action and encourages companies from all sectors to demonstrate their leadership by joining the Call to Action campaign. The initiative particularly welcomes companies from the highest emitting sectors as they play a crucial role in ensuring the transition towards a low-carbon economy.
Currently, the SBTi does not engage with cities, local governments, public sector institutions, educational institutions or non-profit organizations. We hope to expand our focus in the future. However, in the meantime, the initiative encourages all these stakeholders to consider science-based target setting methods and other resources listed on our website and adapt them for their use, whenever possible.
I work for an small or medium sized enterprise. Can my company join the Call to Action?
Yes, the Science Based Targets initiative does not have a restriction on the size of the companies that can join and any company, regardless of size, can set a science-based target. However, in order for a company to successfully set a science-based target a recent, comprehensive greenhouse gas emissions inventory will be required.
Can financial institutions join the Call to Action?
The initiative defines a financial institution as one that engages in investment activities as part of its core functions. These include, but are not limited to, the following:
In addition, if at least 5% of a company’s revenue comes from activities such as those described above, they would also be considered a financial institution.
The financial sector’s largest impact comes from its investment and lending activities (known as scope 3 emissions) and therefore it is imperative that targets for this sector encompass such activities. However, the method for assessing financial institutions’ scope 3 impacts against a well below-2°C emissions trajectory is still being developed. Therefore we cannot yet review or approve any targets submitted by financial institutions. In the interim:
We invite such institutions to publicly commit to setting science-based scope 1, 2 and 3 targets when a methodology is available by signing the Commitment Letter for Financial Institutions. After submitting your commitment letter to , your company will be recognised as “committed” at sciencebasedtargets.org as well as on our partners’ websites at We Mean Business and CDP.
We will also invite all committed financial institutions to participate in any process to develop target setting methods for the sector. Once a target setting method is finalized, all committed financial institutions will be notified and asked to submit their targets for validation within two years.
Note: If a company falls under the definition above but does not consider their investment activities significant/relevant for the purposes of science-based target setting, the company should provide an explanation in its target submission form.
I work for a local council. Are you able to provide advice on setting science-based targets for cities and local government?
At the moment, the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) is focusing on private sector companies and we are currently not accepting commitments from cities and local governments. However, we hope to expand our focus in the future. We recommend that you consider the science-based targets methodologies listed on our website and adapt them whenever possible for your use. In particular, the C-FACT methodology can be used for cities to create climate-stabilising targets.
If my company makes a commitment or sets a target via the Science Based Target initiative (SBTi), can we withdraw at a later date? Are there any repercussions for doing so?
The Science Based Target initiative would strongly discourage companies withdrawing from the initiative but cannot prevent anyone from doing so. All references to companies that withdraw their commitment will be removed from our external materials and communications but there will be no public announcements of such removals.
The SBTi highly encourages committed companies who have concerns about their commitment and are considering withdrawing to get in touch with our team. Our team will do its best to address any concerns and explore ways in which we can provide support in this process.
What happens if we’re unable to set a target within two years? Will our failure to do this be publicised or will there be any other penalties?
The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) is concerned with action in line with the latest climate science - which requires urgent action. Therefore, the SBTi will remove all reference to committed companies that have not set approved targets within 24 months of committing. However, in instances where a company has demonstrated a good-faith effort to develop science-based targets and maintains its commitment to set them within a reasonable timeframe, the 24 month requirement may be waived. The 24 month requirement will also be relaxed in instances where the SBTi has specifically confirmed in written communication that science-based sector methodologies for a company’s sector do not yet exist.
There will be no public announcement or media statements about any companies being removed from our external materials, nor any penalties applied.
Please note that the SBTi highly encourages committed companies who are experiencing difficulties in the target setting progress to get in touch with our team. We are happy to explore ways in which our team can provide support and help the company set a target within the deadline.
How does the Science Based Targets initiative's Call to Action relate to the We Mean Business Commit to Action Campaign?
By default companies that commit to the Science Based Targets initiative’s count toward the We Mean Business campaign (though they may opt out if they choose). However, companies that have committed to set science-based targets through We Mean Business must agree to the additional criteria required by the Science Based Targets initiative by signing the commitment letter.
Through the We Mean Business campaign, companies can also commit to any or all of the following in addition to science-based targets:
procure 100% of electricity from renewable sources (RE100)
remove commodity-driven deforestation from all supply chains
report climate change information in mainstream reports as a fiduciary duty
responsible engagement in climate policy
put a price on carbon
reduce short-lived climate pollutant emission
If I make the WMB commitment do I still need to set a target within two years?
Companies who commit through We Mean Business also need to set a target within 24 months of committing and the same criteria for approving a target applies.
Develop a science-based target
Is the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) able to provide technical assistance to help my company set its target?
The Science Based Targets initiative provides free guidance documents, webinars and other resources such as science-based target setting tools that are available on our website. We highly recommend companies review those resources in depth before submitting their target for validation as this will facilitate the target setting process. Please look at the SBTi Call to Action Guidelines Section 3. Step 2 - Develop a Target and the FAQ “Which guidance documents can help me to set a science-based target?” for more details on which guidance is available.
In addition, companies can obtain feedback on their targets by submitting them to an unofficial or an official target validation. Please note that companies that submitted targets for validation that were not approved by the initiative will receive more in-depth guidance and technical support to improve their targets if they are committed to the initiative.
Which guidance documents can help me to set a science based target?
Refer to the SBTi Criteria and recommendations to know which guidelines your targets must meet to be approved as science-based. In addition, you can review our Target Setting Manual, which provides a detailed explanation of the different approaches and methodologies available, as well as recommendations for setting science-based targets. To obtain specific information on the different methodologies, including tools available, visit our website’s methods section. You can also refer to our case studies page, where we highlight companies’ experiences with setting science-based targets. The case studies explain how companies got internal buy-in to set the targets, the benefits and some of the innovations that are helping them achieve their goals. Finally, visit our eventspage to find previous and future events (including their recordings in some cases) related to this topic.
Should my company set absolute or intensity targets?
Intensity targets are only eligible when they lead to absolute emission reduction targets in line with climate scenarios for keeping warming to within 2°C or when they are modelled using an approved sector pathway or method by the Science Based Targets initiative (e.g. the Sectoral Decarbonization Approach).
WHICH METHOD SHOULD MY COMPANY CHOOSE WHEN SETTING A SCIENCE-BASED TARGET?
Companies should use either a sector-based method (SDA or 3% Solution) or Absolute Emissions Contraction. An economic contraction method may also be used to set an economic intensity target (using C-FACT, CSI, CSO, GEVA). In general, an intensity target should only be set if it leads to absolute reductions in line with climate science or is modelled using a sector-specific pathway (e.g., SDA) that assures emission reductions for the sector as a whole.
Companies should not default to the target that is easiest to meet. The SBTi recommends that companies use the most ambitious decarbonization scenarios and methods that lead to the earliest reductions and the least cumulative emissions. A company should screen several of the methods and choose the method and target that best drives emissions reductions to demonstrate sector leadership. Method selection may also be influenced by practical considerations, such as the availability of input data for the base year and target year. Please refer to the draft Science-based Targets Setting Manual Section 3.3 ‘Selecting an SBT method’ for additional information.
I work for a diverse company that operates across sectors. What approach should I use to set a science-based target?
If a company operates in more than one sector, it should identify the top sectors that cover a majority of its operations. The methods that apply to these sectors can then be used as a benchmark to determine the final target. For example, a company might operate in the aluminium sector and have power generation operations to support the aluminium production. In this case, the company could set two different targets using both the aluminium and power generation sector pathways in the SDA. A company should develop an aggregated target that applies across its entire structure for external reporting and communication, although separate internal targets may be developed by region, sector, facility, or emissions category for ease of tracking and execution.
Does the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) track companies’ progress against their targets?
The Science Based Target initiative does not currently track companies’ progress against their targets but all companies with approved targets are required to annually report their company-wide GHG emissions to ensure that progress towards delivering their targets can be tracked. There are no specific requirements regarding where the inventory should be disclosed, as long as it is public. Recommendations include annual reports, sustainability reports, the company’s website, and/or CDP’s annual questionnaire.
If my company sets a target and then fails to meet it, are there any repercussions?
The Science Based Target initiative (SBTi) does not currently track companies’ progress against delivery of their targets. Should it become apparent through their annual emissions inventories that a company is not delivering on its targets the SBTi reserves the right to remove that company from our external materials and websites.
There will be no public announcements or related media publications if the SBTi deems it necessary to remove a company from its public lists.
Do Scope 3 targets have to be science-based?
Scope 3 targets do not have to be science-based but should be ambitious and meet all SBTi Criteria
related to Scope 3. In addition, the initiative encourages companies to use science-based methods to set their Scope 3 targets, whenever possible. Please refer to our draft Science-based Targets Setting Manual for more information.
Are you able to provide some guidance on how to set a Scope 3 target that will be approved by the Science Based Target initiative?
To be approved by the initiative, companies’ Scope 3 targets must meet all SBTi Criteria relevant to Scope 3 and it is highly recommended they also follow the recommendations available. Although current-science based target setting methods were developed for Scope 1 and 2 only, the Science Based Target initiative (SBTi) recommends that companies use those methods to inform their Scope 3 targets, whenever possible. Additional information on how to adapt those methods to Scope 3 targets can be found in Section 4.3 ‘Model a scope 3 target’ of our draft Science-based Targets Setting Manual.
How does the Science Based Target initiative decide if a target is science based? Which criteria must targets meet to be approved by the initiative?
To determine if a target is science-based, our technical team performs a thorough review and assesses all submitted targets against our SBTi Criteria. To have additional details on how the target validation is performed and the different steps it involves, please refer to the SBTi Call to Action Guidelines.
Will the Science Based Targets initiative review my company’s target without us submitting a commitment letter?
Yes, but we highly recommend that your company commits before submitting a target for review as joining the Call to Action is a two-step process and there are benefits associated with the commitment. (please see FAQ “What are the benefits of joining the Call to Action campaign before submitting targets for validation?” in section “About the SBTi Call to Action”).
I WANT TO SUBMIT MY COMPANY’S TARGET(S) FOR VALIDATION, WHAT SHOULD I DO?
To submit your targets for validation, please download the new Target Submission Form 2.1 and fill it out as clearly, completely, and accurately as possible. Missing, unclear, or erroneous information will result in the validation process being delayed. Please consult the Target Submission Form Guidance before filling out the form as it will help you complete the form adequately. Once the form is completed, please send it together with any supporting documents to [email protected].
Note that the initiative will still accept targets submitted using previous of the form (‘Target Quality Check Form’) until August 16th 2017 but it is highly recommended to use version Target Submission Form 2.1. To understand the difference between the two forms please see the FAQ below.
WHY ARE THERE TWO DIFFERENT FORMS TO SUBMIT TARGETS TO THE INITIATIVE? WHICH ONE SHOULD I USE?
The Science Based Targets initiative has updated the form used by companies to submit targets in order to make it more clear and comprehensive. As a result, the new Target Submission Form 2.1 will help make the target validation process more efficient by ensuring our technical team has all the information needed. In addition, this updated version has an accompanying guidance that companies can use to ensure that they complete the form properly.
Please note that targets submitted using the previous version of the form (‘Target Quality Check Form’) will still be accepted until August 16th 2017. Companies submitting targets after April 16th 2017 should use the Target Submission Form 2.1 and use the accompanying Target Submission Form Guidance 1.1 as those two documents are adapted to the latest SBTi criteria, that became effective on April 16th 2017.
Does the Science Based Target initiative charge a fee for target validations?
Please refer to the FAQ “Do I have to pay a fee to join the SBTi Call to Action?” in the section About the SBTi Call to Action.
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN UNOFFICIAL AND AN OFFICIAL TARGET VALIDATION?
When filling out the target submission form, companies need to select whether they want an unofficial or an official validation. Companies should select unofficial target validation if they would like feedback only on a proposed target. If required, the Science Based Targets initiative will provide formal recommendations to improve the targets so that they meet the SBTi criteria. This feedback can inform internal management decisions in the science-based target setting process.
For more information on the difference between an unofficial and an official target validation, please see refer to Table p.9 in the SBTi Call to Action Guidelines.
HOW IS THE OFFICIAL TARGET VALIDATION PERFORMED?
For details on how the target validation is performed please refer to the SBTi Call to Action Guidelines, in particular to section on Validation process.
WILL INFORMATION SUBMITTED IN THE TARGET SUBMISSION FORM BE DISPLAYED publicly?
The Science Based Targets initiative safeguards the confidentiality of all information provided by the company to assess its targets. This means that information provided will not be shared with external stakeholders or used for any other purpose than validating the target.
If approved, the targets themselves will be published on the initiative’s website as well as the WMB and CDP’s websites. Once a company’s targets are approved, the company is contacted by the SBTi communication team in order to agree on a target wording and coordinate their publication as well as other media outreach opportunities, if available.
IF THE COMPANY DOES NOT PASS THE TARGET VALIDATION IS THIS COMMUNICATED PUBLICLY?
No, the result of the target validation is only communicated publicly if the company’s targets are approved. In any case, the company will receive a private letter by e-mail indicating the results of the target validation.
If my company didn’t pass the target validation process, can we re-submit a revised target? Is there a limit on the number of times a company can submit targets for validation?
Yes, we strongly encourage companies that didn’t pass the target validation to carefully review their targets taking into account the feedback given by our technical team, update their targets accordingly and resubmit them for validation. There is no limit on the number of times a company can re-submit targets for validation although it is expected that companies demonstrate they have made substantial additional efforts to meet the SBTi criteria.
My company is not able to set a Scope 3 target at this time, but we would like to set a science-based target for our Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions. Can the SBT initiative verify this target and/or can this target be submitted for an unofficial validation?
In order to be officially approved by the initiative, the submitted target(s) must meet all the SBTi criteria, including the Scope 3 criteria. Criterion C11 indicates that a Scope 3 target is required for companies whose Scope 3 emissions cover more than 40% of their Scopes 1, 2 and 3 emissions. Thus, if your company’s Scope 3 emissions are above that threshold and you submit targets for an official validation but include only Scope 1 and Scope 2 targets, your targets will not pass the target validation. However, you can submit your Scope 1 and Scope 2 targets for an unofficial validation, in order to receive feedback on those targets. Please see FAQ ‘What is the difference between an unofficial and an official target validation?’ for more information.
Science Based Target initiative criteria
What are the emissions scopes?
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol categorises direct and indirect emissions into three broad scopes:
Scope 1: Direct GHG emissions occur from sources that are owned or controlled by the company, for example, emissions from combustion in owned or controlled boilers, furnaces, vehicles, etc.; emissions from chemical production in owned or controlled process equipment.
Scope 2: Indirect greenhouse gas emissions from consumption of purchased electricity, heat or steam.
Scope 3: Other indirect emissions, such as the extraction and production of purchased materials and fuels, transport-related activities in vehicles not owned or controlled by the reporting entity, electricity-related activities (e.g. T&D losses) not covered in Scope 2, outsourced activities, waste disposal, etc. For specific guidance on what to include in Scope 3, please refer to GHG Protocol Scope 3 Guidance
What constitutes as company-wide scope 1 and 2 emissions?
The company’s greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory boundaries should be in accordance with the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard.. The GHG Protocol Corporate Standard requires seven gases to be included in inventories: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC), perfluorocarbons (PFC), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3). As indicated by the SBTi Criteria
C2, companies may exclude up to 5% of scope 1 and scope 2 emissions combined in their inventory and target.
For more information on ensuring the completeness and transparency of your GHG inventory, please refer to the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard, in particular to Chapter 1 ‘GHG Accounting and Reporting Principles’, Chapter 3 ‘Setting Organizational Boundaries’ and Chapter 4 ‘Setting Operational Boundaries.’
Are combined scope targets accepted?
Targets that combine scopes (e.g. 1+2 or 1+2+3) are permitted. For example, in a target where there is a 30% absolute emissions reduction applied to scopes 1+2 combined from 2010 to 2030, the 30% reduction can come from scope 1 and 2 or only from one of the scopes. In the latter case, the company has to compensate for the other scope. That means, if each scope is 100 gt CO2 eq (200 gt CO2 for S1+S2 total) and the company wants to reduce its scope 1 and 2 emissions by 30% through reducing only one scope, then that scope emissions have to be reduced by 60 gt CO2eq.
For combined scopes 1+2+3, note that starting from April 16th 2017, SBTi Criteria C9 requiring that the scope 1 and 2 portion of the target is in line with climate science will be valid.
Regarding the timeframe criterion to have the target end within a minimum of 5 years and maximum of 15 years from the date of the announcement of the target, what is defined as the announcement of the target?
All targets must cover a minimum of 5 years and a maximum of 15 years from the date the target is submitted to the Science Based Targets initiative for an official check.
Please note that only targets submitted in the first half of a calendar year can include that year toward the 5-year minimum. For example, companies submitting a target by the end of June 2016 can have a target year between 2020 and 2030. Targets submitted July to December 2016 must have a target year between 2021 and 2031. If the target is slightly shorter or longer than this period, the Steering Committee may allow it.
WHAT YEAR SHOULD THE COMPANY USE TO DETERMINE IF ITS SCOPE 3 EMISSIONS ARE SIGNIFICANT (GREATER THAN 40%) OF THE TOTAL?
The target base year. If base year information is not available for scope 3, the company may use the most recent year with complete data.
Where should the company disclose its greenhouse gas emissions inventory and progress against their targets on an annual basis?
There are no specific requirements on where the inventory should be disclosed, as long as it is public. Recommendations include annual reports, sustainability reports, the company’s website, and/or CDP’s annual questionnaire.
How should the company report any significant changes in growth projections and other assumptions used with the science based target setting methodologies and significant changes to its business or data and emissions factors used in its inventory process?
The company should notify any member of the Science Based Targets initiative of any significant changes. It is also recommended to report these major changes publically, as relevant. In addition, please note that the SBTi recommends that science-based targets are recalculated, as needed, to reflect significant changes that would compromise its relevance and consistency.
To ensure consistent tracking of performance over time, a company should recalculate its SBT, as needed, to reflect significant changes that would otherwise compromise the target’s relevance. Recalculation should be triggered by significant changes* in:
- Company structure (e.g. acquisition, divestiture, mergers, insourcing or outsourcing)
- Methodology for calculating the base year inventory (e.g., improved emissions factors or activity data)
- Methodology for calculating the target (e.g., emissions scenarios, growth projections and other assumptions)
- Recalculations should also be performed for the discovery of significant errors
* To determine whether the cumulative impact of such changes warrants recalculations, companies should adopt a significance threshold. The GHG Protocol does not specify a threshold value, although a 5% value is generally recommended. Using a 5% threshold, changes would be considered significant if, in the aggregate, they affect the SBT by more than 5%. Once defined, a significance threshold should be applied consistently over time.
For more information please see the SBTi Criteria and recommendations R13 - Target recalculation.
Do offsets count towards science based targets?
The use of offsets is not counted as reductions toward the progress of companies’ science-based targets. The SBTi requires that companies set targets based on emission reductions through direct action within their own boundaries or their value chains. Offsets are only considered to be an option for companies wanting to contribute to finance additional emission reductions beyond their science-based target/net-zero.
The SBTi recommendations (R9 – Heat and steam) states that companies should model heat and steam related emissions as if they were part of their Scope 1 emissions, when should we apply this?
This applies to Scope 2 targets modelling. For science-based target modelling purposes, when using the SDA, it is recommended that companies model purchased heat and steam related emissions as if they were part of their direct (i.e. scope 1) emissions.
DO RENEWABLE ENERGY INSTRUMENTS COUNT TOWARD SCIENCE-BASED TARGETS?
Renewable energy instruments such as renewable energy certificates (RECs) should only be used to meet reductions of scope 2 emissions using the market based approach. Please see the GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance for further guidance on scope 2 accounting.
HOW DOES THE COP21 PARIS AGREEMENT AFFECT THE RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF AMBITION OF TARGETS?
The Paris Agreement achieved at COP21 aims to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change namely by “holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change.” The Science Based Targets initiative’s partners (CDP, UN Global Compact, WWF and WRI) welcome the UNFCCC parties’ agreement.
The SBTi continues to recommend that companies go beyond the minimum required 2°C pathways and pursue targets that are in line with the well below 2°C objective. This entails setting more ambitious targets than those derived using the IPCC RCP 2.6 and IEA 2 degree scenarios that methods to date rely on. Exceeding the requirements of a 2°C scenario will provide essential first steps to “pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C.” The Science Based Targets initiative plans to develop guidance on pursuing a well below 2°C pathway as scenario information becomes available.
Considering that both the well-below 2°C and the within 2°C scenarios involve the same information companies need to set targets and involve similar technological feasibilities, companies should take action now on raising ambition beyond the 2°C minimum. Delaying action on increasing ambition beyond 2°C is detrimental to averting the worst impacts from climate change.
Scoring Science Based Targets in CDPs 2017 Climate Change questionnaire
Where can I find resources related to science-based targets scoring CDP's 2017 climate change questionnaire?
Companies should refer to CDP’s 2017 Technical Note on science-based targets which will provide them with guidance on science-based greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets in CDP’s 2017 climate change questionnaire as well as with a summary of the steps they should undertake in order to obtain points with science-based targets.
Please refer to Chapter 2 ‘How science-based targets are scored in the 2017 climate change questionnaire‘(p.3) of CDP’s 2017 Technical Note on science-based targets.
WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE SBTi’s OFFICIAL TARGET VALIDATION AND CDP’S QUESTIONNAIRE CRITERIA FOR LEADERSHIP LEVEL POINTS?
Please refer to section 2.2 ‘Leadership level points’ (p. 5) of CDP’s 2017 Technical Note on science-based targets.
WHY DO THE CRITERIA FOR THE TWO ROUTES DIFFER?
CDP aims to minimise the reporting burden on companies, in part by reducing changes to the questionnaire from year to year. At the same time, CDP must collect enough information to assess the appropriateness of thousands of company targets. The questions in the climate change questionnaire balance the dynamics of these two contrasting principles. As a result, CDP is unable to collect the type and amount of information necessary to determine if a target is science-based. This reflects a difference in the applications of best practices rather than the principles behind the best practices themselves.
WHAT IS THE DEADLINE FOR A TARGET TO COUNT FOR CDP SCORING IN CDP’s CLIMATE CHANGE QUESTIONNAIRE 2017?
For a target validation to count for CDP scoring, be sure to tick the box that says official check/validation in the target submission from and to send the form to [email protected] by 23:59 UTC-12 April 15, 2017. Missing or disorganised information may cause delays in the target review process potentially resulting in the assessment not being recognised in time for CDP scoring. Be sure to also disclose this target in the CDP questionnaire.
HOW AND WHEN WILL COMPANIES RECEIVE A DECISION FROM THE INITIATIVE ON WHETHER OR NOT THEIR TARGET IS SCIENCE-BASED?
The SBTi will email the contact listed on the target submission form a letter stating whether or not the target was approved as science-based. If the target is not approved, the letter will state where it has not met the SBTi criteria. Companies should expect to receive this information no later than by the end of June 2017 for targets submitted for CDP Scoring by 23:59 UTC-12 April 15, 2017.
ARE TARGETS THAT QUALIFY FOR LEADERSHIP THROUGH THE CDP QUESTIONNAIRE BUT HAVEN’T PASSED THE SBTi OFFICIAL TARGET VALIDATION CONSIDERED SCIENCE-BASED TARGETS?
CDP only considers companies whose targets have been formally assessed through the SBTi official target validation as science-based.
IF MY TARGETS WERE APPROVED LAST YEAR AND I OBTAINED LEADERSHIP POINTS FOR CDP’s CLIMATE CHANGE QUESTIONNAiRE 2016, WILL I AUTOMATICALLY OBTAIN POINTS FOR THIS YEAR’s QUESTIONNAIRE? DO I NEED TO RESUBMIT TARGETS?
If you have targets that were approved by the SBTi for CDP’s 2016 climate change questionnaire, you will receive Leadership points for them. You do not need to resubmit targets as long as they are still valid by the time CDP scoring for 2017 is finalised (for example, if your targets were approved last year but you later withdrew them, you won’t receive Leadership points for those targets).