The new SBTI standard (V2) is out, what are the biggest differences that we have noticed and what are their consequences?

SBTi Net-Zero Standard V2

The new version of the SBTi Net-Zero Standard moves the focus beyond setting credible science-based targets. Companies will increasingly need to show how those targets are being delivered, how progress is measured, and how responsibility is taken for emissions that remain on the pathway to net zero.

Delivery

Targets + action

Implementation and progress become central

Scopes 1 & 2

Separated

Dedicated accountability for each scope

Scope 3

More targeted

Focus on material and influenceable sources

Base years

More current

Refreshed for successive target cycles

Removals

Clearer pathway

More explicit treatment of ongoing emissions

The common thread is stronger accountability: companies must connect ambition, evidence and delivery.

1. Target-setting is no longer enough

Version 1 mainly focused on defining and validating credible science-based targets. V2 keeps that foundation but places much greater emphasis on how companies implement those targets, track progress, report outcomes and demonstrate accountability over time.

Step 1

Set credible targetsEstablish science-based ambition and a clear pathway.

Step 2

Implement and trackTake action, monitor performance and explain progress.

Step 3

Report and assureSupport later target cycles with robust evidence and, where required, independent assurance.

This shift is reflected in the new SBTi Assurance Model. The process expands from validating target ambition at the point of submission to also assessing company-reported progress during later target cycles. Where required, this progress must be supported by independent third-party assurance.

SBTi and SBTi-recognised validation bodies do not independently verify companies’ emissions data. Responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of submitted information remains with the company and its assurance provider.

Consequence

A credible target will need a credible delivery system behind it: reliable emissions data, documented actions, clear governance, progress reporting and assurance-ready evidence.

2. Scope 1 and Scope 2 targets are treated separately

One of the most significant changes is the requirement for separate Scope 1 and Scope 2 targets. Under the previous framework, companies could combine these emissions into a single reduction target. This meant that a strong reduction in the carbon intensity of purchased electricity could hide limited progress in reducing emissions from company-owned operations.

Previous approach

Combined Scope 1 + 2 target

Renewable electricity procurement could deliver most of the reported reduction while operational Scope 1 emissions changed very little.

V2 approach

Separate Scope 1 and Scope 2 targets

Each scope requires its own accountability and a dedicated decarbonisation strategy.

By separating the targets, SBTi increases transparency and ensures that organisations address both direct operational emissions and purchased-energy emissions rather than relying on progress in one area to compensate for limited action in the other.

Consequence

Companies will need distinct plans, metrics and investment decisions for operational decarbonisation and energy procurement.

3. Scope 3 becomes more targeted and practical

SBTi V2 makes Scope 3 target-setting more specific by focusing requirements on the most significant categories and the emissions sources where companies can credibly act. Rather than treating Scope 3 as one broad category, the standard allows companies to focus on categories that individually represent 5% or more of Scope 3 emissions, while permitting limited and justified exclusions where there is little practical ability to influence outcomes.

V2 also introduces a wider set of target-setting options:

Emissions-reduction targets

Supplier-alignment targets

Customer-alignment targets

Volume-alignment targets

Product-related targets

This makes Scope 3 target-setting more practical, but it also requires stronger evidence. Companies will need to demonstrate which sources are material, where they have influence, why any exclusions are justified and what actions they can realistically take across their value chains.

Consequence

The exercise becomes less about adopting one broad Scope 3 percentage and more about building an evidence-based value-chain strategy around materiality and influence.

4. Base years become more current and cycle-based

V2 changes how companies select the base year for near-term targets. Instead of relying on an older historical base year, companies must use the most recent year for which comprehensive emissions and other relevant data are available.

Current cycle

Select the latest year with comprehensive and reliable data.

Delivery period

Track implementation and demonstrate progress against the target.

Next cycle

Set a new base year using the latest available comprehensive data.

For each new target cycle, companies must select a new target base year based on the latest available comprehensive data. This should make targets more representative of the company’s current structure, activities and emissions profile.

Consequence

Target-setting becomes a rolling management process. Companies will need consistent inventories and governance that can support successive cycles rather than treating one historical base year as a permanent reference point.

5. Carbon removals and ongoing emissions receive clearer treatment

V2 provides clearer treatment of carbon removals and ongoing emissions. The proposed changes give companies a more structured way to demonstrate responsibility for emissions that remain on the pathway to net zero.

Under the previous standard, guidance on carbon credits and beyond-value-chain mitigation was more limited. This may have made some organisations cautious about funding eligible climate projects. The new approach could provide greater clarity on how these contributions are recognised and how they fit within a credible net-zero strategy.

In the coming years

Companies make their position explicit

• Companies will need to state whether they intend to take responsibility for their ongoing emissions. Those that do not will be expected to explain their rationale.
• Companies may receive SBTi recognition for purchasing carbon credits or otherwise funding eligible climate projects, providing a clearer recognition mechanism for climate contributions.

From 2035 onwards

Removal requirements are expected to phase in

• Carbon removals are expected to become mandatory for medium to large companies in high-income countries, beginning at 1% of ongoing emissions and increasing linearly to 100% by the company’s net-zero target year.
• Companies will also need to support long-lived removals equal to at least 10% of covered emissions attributable to long-lived greenhouse gases, increasing linearly to 100% by the net-zero date.
• Some elements of the post-2035 requirements are expected to be reviewed in future versions to reflect the latest science.

The removals provisions described above include proposed and future requirements. Their detailed application may continue to evolve as the standard and underlying science develop.

Overall, the direction of travel is towards clearer expectations, stronger accountability and more transparent recognition of climate-related contributions. It also creates a stronger long-term demand signal for durable and engineered removal solutions.

What companies should do now

• Review whether existing Scope 1 and Scope 2 targets, plans and performance metrics can be separated clearly.
• Strengthen emissions-data controls, progress reporting and assurance readiness.
• Map material Scope 3 categories and document where the company has credible influence.
• Prepare inventory processes to support more current base years and successive target cycles.
• Develop a clear position on ongoing emissions, climate contributions and the future use of carbon removals.

What this means in practice

SBTi V2 is not simply a technical update to target-setting rules. It changes what a credible net-zero programme needs to look like inside a company. Targets will need to be supported by operational plans, robust data, value-chain engagement, governance and evidence that progress is actually being made.

Opportune can help organisations interpret the new requirements, review their greenhouse gas inventories and target architecture, strengthen assurance readiness and translate net-zero ambition into an actionable delivery plan. Get in touch with Opportune to discuss what SBTi V2 could mean for your organisation.