Menu
Despite being four years into the pivotal decade for combating climate change, only a handful of companies have committed to 2030 goals grounded in the latest climate science and accompanied by tangible strategies for implementation, reveals the 2024 Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor.
It’s time to urgently move towards robust regulation that sets binding targets and substantiates them with concrete, effective measures to mitigate risks and meet the objectives of the Paris Agreement.
2030 targets and actions fall short of the level of ambition needed to keep global temperature rises within the relatively safe 1.5°C zone.
Many companies understate their actual carbon footprint by excluding scope 2 (emissions related to energy generation) and scope 3 (emissions form elsewhere on their value chain) emissions when formulating their targets.
Many lean heavily on questionable solutions, such as carbon capture and utilisation, carbon removals, renewable energy certificates and bioenergy.
There is a trend of companies silently moving away from carbon neutral claims. However, many companies still disproportionately rely on offsets to give the impression or illusion that they are decarbonising faster than they actually are.
There's a growing need for strong regulatory measures that complement and enhance these voluntary efforts, ultimately ensuring a more comprehensive and accountable approach to societal and environmental challenges.
“As we navigate the complexities of corporate climate accountability, one thing is certain: voluntary initiatives alone won’t suffice. It’s time for robust regulation to ensure that corporate actions align with the urgency of the climate crisis, moving us beyond rhetoric towards meaningful emission reductions.”
Benja Faecks – Expert on Global Carbon Markets, Carbon Market Watch
Since voluntary initiatives alone won’t suffice to keep companies in line with the objectives of the Paris Agreement, governments must step up.
No scope 3 flexibility under the Voluntary Carbon Market Initiative (VCMI) and greater stringency for Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG-P) revision of scope 2 guidance
2030 targets must be substantiated with measures to reduce emissions in line with sectoral science-based recommendations/benchmarks
No reliance on false solutions like bioenergy, RECs, offsetting (and insetting), and carbon removals.
End creative accounting, such as with renewable energy contracts and scope 3 flexibility
You can find more information about the 2024 Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor methodology here.
As Euro 2024 kicks off, the tournament has been caught offside with some of its climate claims. UEFA must do better to tackle its carbon footprint.
At a time when global carbon emissions need to be almost halved by 2030, 51 major corporations’ climate commitments amount only to reducing their median carbon footprint by as little as 30%, reveals the 2024 Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor. Tighter regulations from governments are needed to raise the bar, both for companies which are taking insufficient action, and those who are not doing anything at all.
The European Parliament’s vote on a bill aimed at combating greenwashing upheld a ban on describing products as “carbon neutral” but failed to apply the same principle to companies.
A spate of recent studies are being used to claim a causal link for companies that offset their emissions between their use of carbon credits and their rate of internal decarbonisation. However, the available evidence tells a different story about whether or not companies exploit carbon markets as a licence to pollute.
Companies selling in the European Union will no longer be able to claim that their products are carbon or climate neutral, the EU has provisionally agreed. This victory against greenwashing corresponds to longstanding demands from climate campaigners to eliminate the use of offsets and send a signal to the voluntary carbon market.
Guidance on the use of carbon credits by private companies published today by the Voluntary Carbon Market Integrity Initiative (VCMI) is a step in the right direction to rein in greenwashing. The proposed set of rules forms a welcome basis to move the conversation forward but more attention should be given to how companies can contribute to climate action outside of carbon markets.
he European Parliament has demonstrated a strong commitment to both consumer protection and the climate when it voted in favour of a ban on companies making “carbon neutral” claims. The Council of the European Union and the European Commission must support such a prohibition during the ongoing legislative process to review EU consumer protection rules.
Our latest report reveals how we are reaching peak “carbon neutrality” but the tide is turning on this disingenuous form of marketing and climate action will be better for it.
Although the European Commission understands the problems created by greenwashing, its proposed Green Claims Directive will not end these damaging practices.
Major corporations are making disingenuous ‘net zero’ and ‘carbon neutral’ claims based on dubious emissions offsetting practices rather than actual cuts. This cannot continue.
Carbon removals are not meant as a tool for corporate greenwashing or climate inaction. They should only be used to reduce the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
Despite claiming to be champions of climate action, two dozen of the world’s largest and richest corporations are hiding their climate inaction behind the fig leaf of green-sounding ‘net zero’ plans, concludes the 2023 edition of the Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor. For that reason, governments must stop their dithering and regulate robustly what green claims companies are permitted to make.
Stay in touch and receive our monthly newsletter, campaign updates, event invites and more.
