UK-based Climate Impact Partners has urged the Science Based Targets initiative to adopt a more pragmatic approach in its updated Corporate Net-Zero Standard 2.0, arguing that key revisions are needed to boost corporate climate ambition and accelerate near-term impact.

In a formal response to SBTi’s public consultation, published on June 2, the climate finance and project development firm praised the initiative’s role in driving science-based targets.

Still, it warned that the current draft risks setting unrealistic hurdles for businesses, particularly smaller companies, seeking to cut emissions and contribute to net-zero goals.

Four Key Recommendations

CIP outlined four primary recommendations for revising the draft standard, emphasizing the need to balance ambition with feasibility:

  1. Supplier Engagement: The company expressed concern that making supplier engagement mandatory for Scope 3 target-setting could exclude companies with less supply chain leverage. Instead, it urged the SBTi to promote supplier engagement as a best practice, supported by guidance and tools, without turning it into a rigid requirement.
  2. Scope 3 Mitigation: Climate Impact Partners recommended that the SBTi provide clear, consistent guidance on market-based tools such as book-and-claim systems and insetting. It called for alignment with upcoming Greenhouse Gas Protocol revisions to harmonize rules across frameworks and help companies navigate emissions accounting with greater confidence.
  3. Carbon Removals: The organization endorsed the inclusion of interim carbon removal targets but criticized restrictive permanence criteria. It advocated a phased approach, allowing companies to scale up durable removals over time, aligned with accepted standards, such as the Oxford Principles. It also urged the SBTi to explicitly allow high-quality carbon credits as part of removal strategies, including for Scope 3 residual emissions.
  4. Beyond Value Chain Mitigation: The letter emphasized the importance of recognizing BVCM, such as investment in external mitigation projects, as a legitimate component of corporate climate strategies. Climate Impact Partners proposed a tiered recognition model to include more companies, especially those with fewer resources, while ensuring that internal reductions remain the core requirement.

Scope 3 is all-encompassing emissions for a company’s products — not just what the company created to make the products, but also emissions spewed when the product is used. A prime example of this is carbon dioxide emissions from gasoline-powered cars. That represents Scope 3 emissions from oil companies.

A Call for Flexibility and Clarity

The submission reflected growing corporate interest in practical pathways to meet net-zero goals amid increasing scrutiny of voluntary climate claims.

CIP emphasized that companies should be supported, not penalized, for utilizing available tools to drive progress, particularly in the complex and indirect realm of Scope 3 emissions.

“The CNZS has the potential to channel significant private finance towards climate mitigation,” the organization wrote. “But to realize that potential, the standard must evolve with transparency and inclusivity, upholding scientific rigor while ensuring companies can act meaningfully across their value chains and beyond.”

SBTi Faces Industry Pressure Ahead of CNZS 2.0 Finalization

The consultation on the revised Corporate Net-Zero Standard comes as the SBTi seeks to reaffirm its credibility following recent internal disputes and public debate over the role of carbon offsets. A final version of the CNZS 2.0 is expected later this year.

CIP’s response adds to a growing list of industry voices calling on the SBTi to provide clearer rules and practical flexibility, aiming to unlock broader participation in global decarbonization efforts.

Also Read:

SBTi Unveils Draft Corporate Net-Zero Standard, Opens Public Consultation