Wind turbine blades racked in a yard

Target & reduce · 14

SBTi target setting

Targets validated to science.

In short

SBTi validates corporate emissions targets against what climate science requires. Its Corporate Net-Zero Standard V2 becomes mandatory for new targets from 1 January 2028, and for the first time formally recognises carbon credits — though not against near-term reduction targets, which still require cuts inside your own boundary.

What it is

The Science Based Targets initiative validates corporate emissions targets against climate science. We set near-term and net-zero targets across Scope 1, 2 and 3 under the SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard, and manage them through validation.

Why it matters

SBTi validation is increasingly what investors and customers expect before they’ll treat a target as credible, and getting the architecture right now avoids re-work as the standard evolves.

11,000+
organisations hold or have committed to science-based targets

SBTi is the default reference for credible climate action: over 11,000 organisations hold or have committed to science-based targets, and 51% of Fortune Global 500 companies now hold net-zero targets (iCOR; Terrapass / SBTi, 2026). The Net-Zero Standard V2 becomes mandatory for new targets from 1 January 2028, recognises carbon credits formally for the first time (reduction and removal credits from 2027, removals required from 2035), and introduces an Ongoing Emissions Responsibility framework aligned with the VCMI Claims Code (Terrapass; South Pole, 2026).

What & how we do it

The work, in the order we do it.

  • Design near-term and net-zero targets across all three scopes
  • Model them to stay ambitious yet fundable
  • Manage submission and validation
  • Build V2 readiness — interim removals and ongoing emissions — into the design from the start

Standards & frameworks

  • SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard (V2)
  • GHG Protocol

The rules, as they stand

What the regulation actually says.

SBTi at a glance
Position as at September 2026
Organisations with or committed to targetsMore than 11,000 — around 25% of global revenue and 40% of global market capitalisationiCOR, June 2026
Fortune Global 50051% hold net-zero targets, up from 8% in 2020Terrapass, July 2026
Net-Zero Standard V2Mandatory for new targets from 1 January 2028; companies with 2030 targets stay on V1 for the current cycleGreenCalculus; Terrapass, 2026
Carbon creditsReduction and removal credits recognised from 2027; removals required from 2035Terrapass; South Pole, 2026
Near-term targetsCredits do not count — near-term targets require in-boundary reductionsSBTi V2; iCOR, 2026

Key dates

  1. 1 February 2027Companies without existing targets can begin setting to V2.
  2. 2027Reduction and removal credits recognised under the Ongoing Emissions Responsibility framework.
  3. 1 January 2028V2 becomes mandatory for new targets.
  4. 2035Removals required.

Common questions

Not for near-term reduction targets — those require reductions inside your own boundary. V2 recognises credits for the first time, from 2027, under the Ongoing Emissions Responsibility framework and for beyond-value-chain mitigation, with removals required from 2035.

For new targets, from 1 January 2028. Companies with 2030 targets stay on V1 for the current cycle, and companies without targets today can start on V2 from 1 February 2027.

Ongoing Emissions Responsibility — the V2 framework covering the emissions a company continues to release while decarbonising. It is closely aligned with the VCMI Claims Code.

In practice, yes. More than 11,000 organisations hold or have committed to science-based targets, representing roughly a quarter of global revenue and 40% of global market capitalisation. Among the Fortune Global 500, 51% now hold net-zero targets, against 8% in 2020.

The submission itself is the short part. The work is the inventory and the pathway behind it — a target is only validated if the Scope 1, 2 and 3 baseline underneath it holds up.

Targets are recalculated rather than quietly dropped, and the credibility cost of an unexplained miss is higher than the cost of a target set carefully in the first place. That is an argument for a pathway you can fund, not the most ambitious one available.

Set validated targets.

Tell us your baseline year and growth plan and we will model a target that is ambitious and fundable.

A senior specialist replies within one business day.