Why science-based targets are gaining importance
As climate commitments become more widespread, the focus is shifting from ambition to credibility. Organisations are increasingly expected not only to set net-zero or emission reduction targets, but also to demonstrate that these targets are aligned with climate science and supported by clear methodologies.
In this context, the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) has emerged as a widely recognised framework for defining and validating corporate climate targets. It provides guidance on how organisations can align their emissions reduction pathways with the goals of the Paris Agreement, particularly the objective of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.
This shift reflects broader stakeholder expectations. Investors, regulators and customers are asking how targets are defined, whether they are independently validated and how progress is measured over time. As a result, science-based targets are becoming a key reference point for credible climate action.
What SBTi means in practice
At its core, SBTi translates global climate goals into company-level emissions reduction pathways. It defines how quickly and by how much organisations need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across their operations and value chains.
In practice, this typically involves:
-
Defining organisational boundaries and emissions coverage (Scope 1, Scope 2 and relevant Scope 3 categories).
-
Selecting appropriate target-setting methods based on sector, business model and emissions profile.
-
Aligning reduction pathways with 1.5°C or well-below 2°C scenarios in line with SBTi criteria.
-
Establishing a base year and target timeframe, usually 5–10 years for near-term targets, with longer horizons for net-zero commitments.
A key feature of SBTi is its emphasis on Scope 3 emissions, particularly for sectors where value chain impacts are significant. This often requires organisations to move beyond internal operations and engage suppliers, customers and other partners to address emissions outside their direct control.
The target setting and validation process
Setting science-based targets is a structured process that combines internal analysis with external validation.
1. Target development
Organisations assess their emissions baseline, identify reduction opportunities and define targets aligned with SBTi criteria. This stage usually requires cross-functional collaboration between sustainability, finance, operations, procurement and, in some cases, strategy teams.
2. Submission and validation
Targets are submitted to SBTi for independent review. The validation process assesses whether proposed targets are consistent with the latest climate science, relevant sectoral pathways and SBTi methodologies.
3. Commitment and disclosure
Once validated, organisations publicly disclose their targets and integrate them into broader sustainability strategies and reporting frameworks. Targets are often communicated through sustainability reports, investor updates and corporate websites.
Validation plays a critical role in strengthening credibility. It provides external assurance that targets are not only ambitious, but also methodologically sound and aligned with recognised standards.
From targets to implementation
Setting targets is only the starting point. The real challenge lies in translating these commitments into operational change.
In practice, this requires embedding climate considerations into core business processes such as:
-
Capital allocation and investment decisions, including low-carbon technologies and transition projects.
-
Energy sourcing and efficiency improvements across sites and operations.
-
Supplier engagement and procurement criteria, for example integrating emissions performance into supplier selection and contracts.
-
Product design and lifecycle considerations, including lower-carbon materials and use-phase impacts.
Organisations also need to establish clear governance structures, define responsibilities and track performance against targets. This often involves integrating emissions metrics into management dashboards and risk processes, and in some cases linking them to executive or management incentives.
Over time, effective implementation depends on aligning strategic priorities with operational realities. Science-based targets need to be supported by realistic transition plans, resource allocation and ongoing monitoring so that commitments translate into measurable emissions reductions.
Common challenges in SBTi adoption
Several challenges tend to emerge as organisations work with science-based targets.
Data availability and quality can be a constraint, particularly for Scope 3 emissions where information depends heavily on suppliers, customers and other external partners. Methodological complexity can also create barriers, especially for organisations with diverse operations, multiple geographies or evolving business models.
Another common challenge is translating long-term targets into short-term actions. Without clear interim milestones, budgets and integration into business planning cycles, targets risk remaining aspirational rather than actionable.
Finally, alignment across functions can be difficult. Delivering on science-based targets often requires changes in procurement, operations, finance, product development and sometimes pricing. Cross-functional coordination and senior-level sponsorship are therefore essential.
Towards credible and actionable climate commitments
Science-based targets represent a shift from broad climate ambition to structured and measurable commitments. By aligning targets with climate science and validating them through recognised frameworks, organisations can strengthen the credibility of their climate strategies.
However, the value of SBTi lies not only in target setting, but in how these targets shape decisions across the organisation. When integrated into governance, strategy and operations, they become a practical tool for managing transition risks, identifying opportunities and guiding capital allocation over time.
For organisations navigating increasing scrutiny and evolving regulatory expectations, science-based targets provide a common language for demonstrating alignment with global climate goals and for translating climate commitments into measurable, time-bound outcomes.