SBTi Board Statement reaction — Carbon markets and their effectiveness
by Tomasz Kaczmarski
The Science Based Targets initiative ( SBTi) is one of the leading organisations in the world of sustainability. Funded by the Bezos Earth Foundation and UN-backed, it tracks whether a company is taking steps in order to help achieve a 1,5 degree celsius decrease in the global temperature. With almost 8 thousand companies under its wing, huge financial backing and science based approach the initiative could be considered as one of the spiritus movens of the green evolution.
That was until the 9th of April 2024 when, unbeknownst to the SBTi’s staff and advisers, the SBTi Board of Trustees released a statement in which they validated carbon markets as an acceptable way of reducing scope 3 emissions (1). This resulted in scathing response supported by “an An overwhelming majority of SBTi staff, including representatives of Impact, Accountability and Services, Research and Technical Development, Communications and Operations”(2) that called for “holding those responsible accountable”(3)
Scope 3 emissions are the result of activities from assets not owned or controlled by the reporting organisation, but that the organisation indirectly affects in its value chain. An organisation’s value chain consists of both its upstream and downstream activities.(4)
The GHG Protocol defines 15 categories of scope 3 emissions, though not every category will be relevant to all organisations.(5)
In the eyes of the staff, the statement flew in the face of the values that SBTi was supposed to represent, namely: quality science based standards; upholding their Standard Operating Procedures and governance processes and lastly — undermine the trust placed in the organisation by the public opinion and stakeholders(6). Not only did the Board circumvent the power of the SBTi Technical Council as the body bestowed with the power to review and approve SBTi’s standards(7), it also did not inform the Council of the plans to release the statement.
In a response, SBTi’s staff assure that the scientific standards will be held and that the assessments of whether Carbon Credits are an effective way of achieving either net- zero greenhouse gases emissions or reducing the global temperature by 1,5 degrees celsius.(8)
In september 2023 The SBTi undertook the “CALL FOR EVIDENCE ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE USE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTE CERTIFICATES IN CORPORATE CLIMATE TARGETS“(9) and while the Technical Department did provide a summary of the results to the Board, the organisation has not yet produced a conclusive and satisfactory analysis of the findings(10). As of the time of their response they SBTi’s staff do not consider Carbon Credits as an emission reduction according to the Net-Zero Standard nor the Financial Institution Guidance due to the insufficient quality and scientific rigour of data collected.(11)
According to the Guardian, additionally the staff called for the” the resignation of CEO Luiz Fernando do Amaral and any board members who supported the decision.”(12) and claiming that the Board’s statement was heavily influenced by lobbyists and the conflict of interests.(13)
In our next reportage we will follow the aftermath of staff’s reaction and with an extensive analysis into the topic of Carbon Credits and Emission reductions and their relation.
Sources:
1.Statement from the SBTi Board of Trustees on use of environmental attribute certificates, including but not limited to voluntary carbon markets, for abatement purposes limited to scope 3
https://sciencebasedtargets.org/news/statement-from-the-sbti-board-of-trustees-on-use-of-environmental-attribute-certificates-including-but-not-limited-to-voluntary-carbon-markets-for-abatement-purposes-limited-to-scope-3
2. SBTi Staff Response to the Board of Trustees April 9 Statement
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/gvjkqr4k4cdtt57qit9s6/SBTi-Staff-Response-to-the-Board-of-Trustees-April-9-Statement.pdf?rlkey=o38yubknqezjqzim44wjtk5fb&e=1&dl=0
3.ibidem
4. United States Environmental Protection Agency; Scope 3 Inventory Guide
https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/scope-3-inventory-guidance
5. Greenhouse Gas Protocol; “Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard”
https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/Corporate-Value-Chain-Accounting-Reporing-Standard-EReader_041613_0.pdf
6. SBTi Staff Response to the Board of Trustees April 9 Statement
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/gvjkqr4k4cdtt57qit9s6/SBTi-Staff-Response-to-the-Board-of-Trustees-April-9-Statement.pdf?rlkey=o38yubknqezjqzim44wjtk5fb&e=1&dl=0
7. SBTi TECHNICAL GOVERNANCE
https://sciencebasedtargets.org/about-us/technical-governance
8. SBTi Staff Response to the Board of Trustees April 9 Statement
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/gvjkqr4k4cdtt57qit9s6/SBTi-Staff-Response-to-the-Board-of-Trustees-April-9-Statement.pdf?rlkey=o38yubknqezjqzim44wjtk5fb&e=1&dl=0
9. CALL FOR EVIDENCE ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE USE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTE CERTIFICATES IN CORPORATE CLIMATE TARGETS
https://sciencebasedtargets.org/resources/files/call-for-evidence-environmental-attribute-certificates.pdf
10. SBTi Staff Response to the Board of Trustees April 9 Statement
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/gvjkqr4k4cdtt57qit9s6/SBTi-Staff-Response-to-the-Board-of-Trustees-April-9-Statement.pdf?rlkey=o38yubknqezjqzim44wjtk5fb&e=1&dl=0
11. ibidem
12. Greenfield Patric , Harvey Fiona, the Guardian, posted 11.04.2024; “ Climate target organisation faces staff revolt over carbon-offsetting plan” https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/apr/11/climate-target-organisation-faces-staff-revolt-over-carbon-offsetting-plan-sbti
13. ibidem
