The Science Based Targets initiative has published SBTi Version 2.0 of its Corporate Net-Zero Standard, marking an important update for businesses setting, renewing or delivering science-based climate targets.
For organisations already working through emissions reporting, supplier engagement and decarbonisation planning, the update may feel like another standard to interpret. However, the main message from SBTi is clear: businesses should not pause climate action while waiting for the new version to become the default route. Companies with existing validated targets can continue with their current target cycle, and those setting or renewing targets in 2026 or 2027 should continue using Corporate Net-Zero Standard Version 1.3.1.
The transition period should be used carefully. Version 2.0 signals where corporate climate action is heading, with stronger emphasis on implementation, progress, transparency and the practical delivery of emissions reductions. For businesses, this is an opportunity to strengthen the foundations behind their climate targets before expectations become more detailed.
Quick Links
| 2. What Has Changed | |
| 3. What Should Businesses Do? | 4. Why Scope 3 Still Matters |
| 5. Why SBTi is Still More Important than Ever |
The SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard provides a science-based framework for companies setting net-zero targets aligned with climate science. It helps organisations define near-term and long-term emissions reduction targets across their operations and value chains, with the aim of reaching net zero by 2050 at the latest.
Version 2.0 builds on the original Corporate Net-Zero Standard, which helped create a clearer and more consistent definition of corporate net zero. Since then, more businesses have set science-based targets, and the practical challenge has shifted from ambition to implementation. Many organisations now understand the importance of setting credible targets, but still face difficulty gathering Scope 3 data, engaging suppliers, tracking progress and translating targets into operational change.
The new standard reflects that shift. It is not only about setting a target that looks credible on paper. It is about giving businesses a clearer framework for delivering progress, explaining barriers and demonstrating that emissions reduction plans are being actively managed.
Version 2.0 introduces several developments that businesses should pay attention to, even if they are not yet using the new standard for validation. The most important theme is implementation. Businesses are being encouraged to show how they will reduce emissions, not simply that they intend to do so.
The updated standard includes an implementation hierarchy, designed to guide companies from direct emissions reductions through to wider action and market instruments that support transformation in the systems and sectors where they operate. It also introduces a best-efforts approach, recognising that companies may face uncertainties and dependencies, particularly in value chains, but still need to use available levers and report progress transparently.
Other developments include SME categorisation and Ongoing Emissions Responsibility, which is intended to recognise contributions beyond a company’s direct decarbonisation pathway. These are important developments, but they do not replace the central expectation that companies should reduce emissions across their own operations and value chains.
For businesses, the practical message is that targets need stronger delivery plans behind them. That means better data, clearer internal ownership, stronger supplier engagement and more credible communication about progress.
The timing of the transition matters. From 1 February 2027, Corporate Net-Zero Standard Version 2.0 will be available for target setting. Until then, companies setting or renewing targets should continue using Version 1.3.1. Version 1 will remain open for target submission until the end of 2027, after which all companies will be required to use Version 2.0.
This creates a useful preparation window. Businesses do not need to stop or delay their target-setting work, but they should use the transition to improve the quality of the information and planning that sits behind their targets.
A practical starting point is to review:
This review helps identify where the organisation is already in a strong position and where further work is needed. It can also reduce the risk of setting targets that later prove difficult to deliver because the underlying data, assumptions or responsibilities were not properly tested.
Scope 3 emissions remain one of the most challenging areas of corporate climate action. For many businesses, the majority of emissions sit outside direct operations, within purchased goods and services, logistics, product use, waste, investments or wider supply chains.
This makes Scope 3 difficult to control, but not optional to understand. Companies need to know where their most material emissions sit, which suppliers or product categories drive the greatest impact, and what interventions are realistically available. Without that understanding, climate targets can become disconnected from business decisions.
Version 2.0 reinforces the importance of implementation and transparency, which makes Scope 3 readiness especially important. Businesses should focus on improving data quality, engaging suppliers and identifying the categories where action will make the greatest difference. The aim is not to create perfect data immediately, but to move from rough estimates towards a more reliable evidence base.
It can be tempting to treat SBTi alignment as simply a reporting task. However, science-based target-setting creates a wider business impact. It can influence procurement, investment, energy use, logistics, product design, supplier relationships and customer communication.
A credible target can support tenders, investor confidence, stakeholder engagement and brand trust. However, those benefits depend on the quality of the work behind the target. A company that sets a net zero target without a clear implementation plan may struggle to demonstrate progress, especially as expectations around climate claims become more rigorous.
The new standard is helpful in this situation because it indicates that companies will be increasingly evaluated on their capacity to achieve results rather than just their aspirations. This does not imply that every business will have instant control over every source of emissions. It does require businesses to be aware of their levers, record their presumptions, and be transparent about their progress.
Businesses should use the transition period to build a stronger foundation for target-setting and delivery. This does not need to be overcomplicated, but it does need to be structured.
Step 1: Review your emissions baseline
Check whether your Scope 1, 2 and 3 data is complete, current and based on appropriate methods. Pay particular attention to areas where estimates, outdated supplier data or broad assumptions are being used.
Step 2: Identify material emissions sources
Focus on the categories that matter most. For some companies, this may be purchased goods and services. For others, it may be logistics, product use, waste, energy or land-related emissions. Prioritising material sources helps avoid spreading effort too thinly.
Step 3: Strengthen supplier engagement
Where Scope 3 emissions are significant, suppliers will often hold the information needed to improve accuracy and reduce impact. Businesses should begin conversations early, especially where data quality is weak or procurement decisions could influence emissions.
Step 4: Build an implementation plan
Targets need practical delivery routes. This may include renewable energy procurement, operational efficiency, supplier requirements, logistics changes, product redesign, material substitution or investment decisions. Each action should have ownership, timelines and a way to measure progress.
Step 5: Review climate claims
Claims about net zero, carbon reduction or climate leadership should be specific, evidence-led and aligned with the organisation’s actual progress. As SBTi develops further claims guidance, businesses should ensure their communication is accurate and proportionate.
The new SBTi Version 2.0 shows that corporate climate action is moving into a more practical phase. Setting a target is no longer enough on its own. Businesses need to demonstrate how targets will be delivered, how progress will be measured and how barriers will be addressed.
Companies should not delay action while waiting for Version 2.0. Those setting or renewing targets in 2026 or 2027 should continue using Version 1.3.1, while using the transition period to prepare for the stronger implementation focus of the new standard.
For organisations that already have validated targets, the priority is to keep delivering against the current cycle while reviewing how Version 2.0 may shape future expectations. For organisations that have not yet started, now is the time to build a reliable emissions baseline, understand Scope 3 impacts and develop a practical decarbonisation plan.
Tunley Environmental supports organisations with science-based, impact-driven climate strategies. Our scientists can help businesses review emissions data, prepare for science-based target-setting and build practical decarbonisation plans that support credible progress towards net zero.