Your company just announced a bold climate commitment: net-zero by 2050. The board feels confident. The marketing team is ready to celebrate. But there’s a critical question nobody’s asking: Is this target actually aligned with the science?
The difference between a genuinely science-backed climate commitment and greenwashing often comes down to one thing: whether your targets follow the 1.5°C pathway. This isn’t just corporate virtue signaling—it’s the difference between meaningful climate action and missed deadlines.
The 1.5°C pathway is the most ambitious target aligned with the Paris Agreement, aiming to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels to prevent the worst effects of climate change. But what does this actually mean for your organization? And how do you know if your current climate strategy measures up?
Why 1.5°C Matters More Than Ever
The science is unequivocal. Every tenth of a degree matters. Limiting warming to 1.5°C prevents irreversible damage to ecosystems, and reduces climate-related risks to your business, supply chain, and bottom line. A 2°C pathway? That’s a gamble many companies and investors can no longer afford to take.
This shift toward stricter ambition is recent. Before 2021, companies had flexibility in choosing their temperature pathway. But that’s changing. From July 2022, the SBTi requires all new targets to be aligned with 1.5°C for Scope 1 and 2 emissions, and at least well-below 2°C ambition for Scope 3 emissions. This marks a fundamental raising of the minimum ambition level for corporate targets.
The momentum is real. Since June 2019, over 600 companies worldwide have committed to the 1.5°C ambition through the SBTi’s Business Ambition for 1.5°C campaign, representing a market capitalization of about $13 trillion—nearly the GDP of China. By 2021, 66% of all target submissions to the SBTi were aligned with 1.5°C, making it the most common ambition level among businesses.
But commitment and credibility are two different things. Your company needs a robust framework to ensure ambition translates into genuine emissions reductions.
The SBTi’s Framework: Your Roadmap to Credible Targets
The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) provides the gold standard. The SBTi established the Corporate Net-Zero Standard in 2021, serving as the first global science-based standard for corporate net-zero target setting. This framework isn’t optional guidance—it’s the methodology that separates credible commitments from hollow promises.
A complete corporate net-zero target consists of four essential elements (SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard):
- Near-term science-based targets (5-10 years, must align with 1.5°C)
- Long-term science-based targets (to 2050, residual emissions aligned with 1.5°C)
- Neutralization of any residual emissions through permanent carbon removal
- Beyond value chain mitigation (BVCM) to support broader decarbonization efforts
The near-term targets are where most companies stumble. They set ambitious long-term goals but lack the discipline for urgent near-term action. Under the SBTi framework, near-term targets for Scopes 1 and 2 must have a minimum ambition level of 1.5°C (SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard). This means real, measurable emissions reductions starting now—not in 2040.
The intensity of this commitment becomes clear when you look at the numbers. When using the cross-sector pathway for Scope 1 and 2 near-term targets, if your base year is 2020 or earlier, you must commit to a minimum annual linear absolute reduction rate of 4.2% over the target period to ensure 1.5°C alignment (SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard). That’s not incremental improvement—that’s transformation.
Your role in this matters. If you’re building a sustainability strategy, understanding these requirements is crucial. Our guide on how to build a data-driven sustainability strategy walks through exactly how to structure your approach around science-based targets.
Understanding Your Emissions Across All Scopes
Here’s where many companies fall short: they focus on Scope 1 and 2 emissions while ignoring Scope 3. Under the SBTi framework, this is no longer acceptable.
A complete corporate GHG emissions inventory, including Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 emissions, is essential for companies to fully understand their value chain impact and strategically focus their reduction efforts (GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain Accounting Reporting Standard). The Scope 3 Standard specifically aims to help companies identify the greatest opportunities for GHG reduction, supporting target setting.
The requirements are clear: Long-term targets must maintain a minimum ambition of 1.5°C across all scopes (SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard). Not just the emissions you directly control, but every ton of CO2 equivalent across your entire value chain.
This is why Scope 3 matters so much. For many companies—especially in manufacturing, retail, and consumer goods—Scope 3 emissions dwarf Scopes 1 and 2 combined. Yet the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard allows Scope 3 reporting to be optional. The SBTi, however, is stricter: if you’re setting a net-zero target, you can’t opt out of addressing your supply chain.
The accounting and reporting of a Scope 3 inventory must adhere to five core principles (GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain Accounting Reporting Standard): relevance, completeness, consistency, transparency, and accuracy. Companies must account for all Scope 3 emissions and must disclose and justify any categories or activities that are excluded. This transparency is what separates credible climate commitments from selective accounting.
If you’re building your emissions inventory from scratch, you’ll need to make strategic choices about your base year. Our resource on how to choose the right base year for your emissions inventory provides the strategic framework for this decision.
Sector Matters: One Size Does Not Fit All
Your industry changes everything. Companies in the power generation and FLAG (Forest, Land and Agriculture) sectors are mandated to use sector-specific pathways for setting Science-Based Targets instead of the cross-sector pathway (SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard). This reflects reality: a renewable energy company’s decarbonization pathway looks fundamentally different from a cement manufacturer’s.
Other companies have the option to choose between the cross-sector pathway and available sector-specific pathways for their SBTs (SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard). But the SBTi encourages companies to use sector-specific pathways if those pathways demand steeper reductions than the cross-sector pathway. Why? Because your industry’s science-based constraints are real, and pretending otherwise undermines your credibility.
The key insight: sector-specific ambition often reveals hidden reduction opportunities. An automotive manufacturer might discover that electrification pathways require deeper Scope 2 reductions than a generic pathway suggests. A financial services firm might find that financed emissions (Scope 3) demand supplier engagement strategies beyond typical value chain interventions.
Beyond Targets: Building Your Carbon Management Plan
Setting targets is step one. Achieving them requires a structured carbon management plan. This goes far beyond reporting compliance.
How to build a carbon management plan that goes beyond reporting explores the operational infrastructure you need: investment prioritization, technology roadmaps, supply chain engagement, and governance structures.
The SBTi’s validation process reinforces this reality. The SBTi evaluates the methodologies used for setting Scope 3 targets during validation to confirm they meet the minimum ambition level required for temperature alignment or supplier/customer engagement (SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard). This isn’t box-checking—it’s rigorous scrutiny of your actual reduction strategy.
Companies must also annually check the validity of their target-related projections, notify the SBTi of any significant changes, and report these publicly (SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard). This ongoing accountability is what keeps targets credible and prevents the drift between ambition and reality.
The Role of Carbon Credits and Neutralization
Many companies see carbon credits as a shortcut to net-zero. They’re not. Under the SBTi framework, carbon credits serve a very specific function: permanently neutralizing any residual emissions at the net-zero target year and any subsequent GHG emissions released thereafter (SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard).
The distinction is crucial. Neutralization happens after you’ve reduced emissions to the maximum extent possible. It’s not a substitute for emissions reduction. And not all carbon credits are created equal. Our deep dive on the SBTi’s stance on carbon credits: what you can (and can’t) use them for breaks down the complex rules around carbon removal, nature-based solutions, and what the SBTi actually accepts.
The bottom line: carbon credits are a tool for residual emissions, not a replacement for deep decarbonization.
Integration Across Your Organization
Setting a 1.5°C-aligned target requires more than a climate team writing a policy document. Companies adopting 1.5°C-aligned targets are encouraged to integrate climate strategy into all aspects of their operations, including supply chains, product roadmaps, and investment decisions, and to influence policy aligned with this ambition.
This means your procurement team needs to evaluate supplier emissions. Your finance team needs to factor climate risk into capital allocation. Your product development team needs to design for lifecycle carbon reduction. Your investor relations team needs to communicate progress transparently.
If you’re evaluating a potential employer or partnership, understanding how embedded climate ambition is in their operations is critical. Our guide on how to assess sustainability credentials in potential employers helps you distinguish between cosmetic commitments and genuine organizational transformation.
Making the Jump: From Commitment to Credibility
The gap between announcing a 1.5°C target and actually achieving it is where most companies falter. The framework exists. The methodologies are proven. The validators are ready.
What’s missing is often the internal expertise and organizational alignment needed to implement credible climate strategy. This is why sustainability teams are growing rapidly. If you’re building a team or looking to advance your career in this space, CSR Jobs features hundreds of roles across ESG, carbon management, sustainability reporting, and climate strategy—positions created precisely because companies recognize that science-backed targets require dedicated talent.
Browse the CSR Jobs jobboard to explore roles ranging from sustainability managers working on carbon accounting to ESG sustainability reporting managers developing net-zero disclosures. Or if you’re a recruiter looking to build your sustainability team, you can access qualified candidates through the CSR Jobs Talent Pool.
The path forward is clear: your company’s climate ambition must be grounded in science. The 1.5°C pathway isn’t aspirational—it’s the threshold between climate stability and accelerating crisis. The SBTi framework gives you the tools to set credible targets. Your emissions data gives you the baseline. The only variable left is whether your organization commits to the discipline required to achieve them.
The companies that move fast on this will gain first-mover advantages: cleaner operations, stronger stakeholder trust, reduced climate risk, and access to capital increasingly allocated toward genuinely sustainable business models. The companies that don’t? They’ll face mounting regulatory pressure, investor scrutiny, and the growing realization that their 2050 commitments were always theater.
Which side of this divide will your company be on?