Almost a third of large SBTi-validated companies have raised operational emissions since their base year
By Article 6 Network
An analyst group found that almost a third of 1,700 companies with targets validated by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) now have higher operational emissions than in their base year. Limited data makes it hard to judge whether they are still on track for their near-term goals. The finding comes as the SBTi revises its net-zero rules, and it sharpens the debate over the role high-integrity carbon credits, including Article 6 units, should play in corporate climate strategies.
An analysis of 1,700 large companies with SBTi-validated targets found that almost a third report higher operational emissions (Scope 1 and 2) than in the base year their targets are set against, Carbon Pulse reported on 16 October 2026. The analysts cautioned that patchy disclosure makes it difficult to say firmly whether these companies are off track for their near-term targets, which typically run five to ten years.
The findings land as the number of validated companies grows rapidly. SBTi data shows around 12,000 companies with validated targets, about a third more than a year ago. Companies with validated targets account for more than 40% of global market capitalisation and operate in over 90 countries. Japan has the most validated companies, followed by the UK, the US and China.
The SBTi is also revising its framework. It published a draft of version 2 of its Corporate Net-Zero Standard, which will define how companies set, track and report on targets. One question in the revision is how carbon credits can be used alongside direct emission cuts.
Signals to watch
- Credibility gap widens pressure on target-setters: If a large share of validated companies are raising operational emissions, expect tougher scrutiny from investors, regulators and NGOs. That could include stricter SBTi tracking and disclosure requirements in the finalised version 2 of the Corporate Net-Zero Standard.
- Role of carbon credits is being reopened: As companies struggle to cut emissions within their own operations, interest is growing in using high-integrity credits for residual or ongoing emissions. Correspondingly adjusted Article 6 credits and A6.4ERs are well placed to meet corporate integrity standards. How the SBTi treats them in version 2 could shape corporate demand for ITMOs.
- Corporate buyers’ clubs and aggregated demand: Companies with stalled reductions may turn to Article 6-aligned credits to show credible interim action. Aggregation structures and buyer coalitions that can secure authorised credits at scale would benefit.
- Risk of greenwashing claims: Companies that offset without showing real reductions face reputational and legal risk under emerging claims rules, such as the EU’s green claims and consumer protection frameworks. Article 6 credits with clear authorisation and corresponding adjustments give a more defensible basis for claims than unadjusted voluntary credits.
- Data quality is the bottleneck: The analysts’ warning about limited data is itself a signal. Better corporate emissions disclosure, through mandatory reporting under CSRD, ISSB and Japan’s SSBJ standards, will decide whether markets can tell credible corporate performers from laggards.
Sources:
- Carbon Pulse – Large corporations with SBTi targets failing to cut operational emissions
- Carbon Pulse – SBTi-validated targets surge to 12k
- ESG Today – SBTi passes 10,000 companies
- Energy Advice Hub – SBTi reports over 10,000 companies
