SBTi Faces Credibility Test as Firms Explore Alternatives Like ACT and The Climate Pledge
In a pivotal shift for corporate climate accountability, global companies are increasingly opting for more adaptable and inclusive net-zero standards, moving away from the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi). This change marks a significant moment in the climate governance landscape, as organizations seek frameworks that align both with scientific goals and their operational realities.
A recent investigation by U.S.-based sustainability media group Trellis revealed that only 7% of the 239 companies whose net-zero commitments were delisted by the SBTi last year have since revalidated their targets. This modest figure raises questions about the future dominance of SBTi and highlights the growing appeal of alternative initiatives like the Accelerate Climate Transition (ACT) and The Climate Pledge, both of which are gaining traction for their flexibility and alignment with evolving business contexts.
Why Are Companies Moving Away from SBTi?
The SBTi has long been the gold standard for corporate climate commitments, providing scientifically validated pathways for emissions reductions in line with the 1.5°C goal set by the Paris Agreement. However, its stringent validation criteria—particularly around Scope 3 emissions and the limited use of carbon offsets—have made compliance challenging for many firms.
The delisting of 239 companies last year, many of whom had not met the required submission deadlines or failed to align with updated guidelines, sent a ripple through the corporate sustainability world. Since then, only 17 of these organizations have achieved revalidation, according to Trellis.
While some companies are still navigating the validation process, the majority remain on SBTi’s “Commitment Removed” list, leading to concerns over the rigidity and scalability of the SBTi framework.
ACT and The Climate Pledge Gain Ground
In contrast, alternative frameworks are gaining momentum by offering a more practical balance between ambition and feasibility.
French retail giant Carrefour has publicly announced its decision to validate its net-zero goals through the ACT Initiative, developed by the World Benchmarking Alliance. Carrefour has committed to a 1.5°C pathway aligned with the Paris Agreement and is urging its domestic suppliers to follow suit. However, its commitment currently does not include Scope 3 emissions from its supply chain—a requirement under SBTi’s guidelines.
This nuance exemplifies the kind of flexibility that companies are seeking: frameworks that allow them to progress meaningfully without being penalized for systemic challenges that may take longer to address.
Tech Titans Monitor SBTi’s Next Moves
Major players like Microsoft, Unilever, and Walmart are taking a more cautious route. While remaining committed to their own ambitious targets—Unilever, for example, aims for net-zero by 2039—they are closely monitoring how SBTi revises its standards.
Unilever clarified that it follows the IPCC’s definition of net-zero, which, while rooted in science, differs in methodology from SBTi’s framework. The company has not ruled out realignment in the future but emphasized the importance of using standards that reflect the complexity of their global operations.
The SBTi, for its part, has released a draft update to its Corporate Net-Zero Standard and opened it for public consultation. This draft has prompted extensive industry debate, including open letters from sustainability leaders calling for greater inclusivity, realistic timelines, and improved recognition of carbon removal strategies.
The Climate Pledge: A More Open Approach
Another compelling alternative is The Climate Pledge, a global commitment led by Amazon that now includes companies like Microsoft, Procter & Gamble, and Unilever. The Pledge sets a 2040 net-zero target—ten years ahead of the Paris timeline—but offers broader definitions and tools to get there.
Critically, The Climate Pledge does not cap carbon offset usage as SBTi does. While SBTi allows only 10% of residual emissions to be offset, The Climate Pledge offers companies the autonomy to use high-quality credits more freely, especially for hard-to-abate sectors like aviation, logistics, and heavy manufacturing.
This flexibility has made it attractive for companies looking to act urgently without being constrained by limited offset mechanisms or the long validation timelines associated with SBTi.
Sectoral Differences and the Path Forward
Interestingly, different industries are responding in unique ways. Heavy emitters and sectors with complex supply chains—such as retail, consumer goods, and logistics—are leaning toward frameworks like ACT and The Climate Pledge that allow a phased, sectoral approach. Meanwhile, tech companies, due to their higher capacity for rapid decarbonization and access to data, continue to engage with SBTi, albeit cautiously.
The rise of multiple frameworks signals a maturing climate ecosystem. Experts argue that standardization should not mean one-size-fits-all, and room must be made for region-specific and industry-specific challenges.
Dr. Elise Garnier, a climate governance advisor based in Brussels, notes:
“We need a plural approach that preserves scientific integrity but respects the practical differences among global companies. What’s critical is transparency, ambition, and a demonstrated commitment to reduce emissions—not just which badge a company wears.”
Implications for Investors and Policymakers
This shift also carries implications for ESG reporting, green finance, and policy alignment. Investors are increasingly scrutinizing not just whether a company has a net-zero target, but how that target is defined, measured, and validated.
As net-zero pathways diversify, frameworks like ACT and The Climate Pledge must demonstrate their credibility through robust reporting and third-party verification to avoid accusations of greenwashing.
Governments and international agencies may soon need to standardize definitions across frameworks or endorse minimum criteria to ensure comparability and consistency across borders and industries.
A Future with Diverse Pathways
While the SBTi remains a critical actor in the climate space, the message from the corporate world is clear: a singular path to net-zero is no longer practical or preferred. The future of climate action lies in a diverse, interoperable ecosystem of standards, each catering to different needs while upholding shared global goals.
As the climate crisis accelerates, flexibility must be met with integrity. Companies choosing ACT or The Climate Pledge are not stepping back from ambition—they are finding new ways to move forward with speed, relevance, and accountability.
For more in-depth analysis and inspiring climate news, click here.
