The conversation around corporate net zero has moved from ambitious commitments to a defining test of how businesses plan, invest and respond in the long term. The focus is increasingly on what credible corporate action looks like rather than simply setting targets.
A recent session at the Carbon Accounting Alliance Conference explored this shift and what it could mean for the future of corporate net zero. One of the clearest messages was the need for less focus on commitments alone, and more emphasis on contribution, commercial value and delivery. Uncertainty over the rules should not become uncertainty over the objective.
From commitment to delivery
In recent years, businesses have become accustomed to setting long-term targets, often with 2030 or 2050 as key milestones for reaching net zero. However, the conference made clear that targets alone are no longer enough.
Credibility now increasingly comes from implementation, measurable progress and the ability to evidence it. Businesses therefore need to evolve from commitment to delivery.
So, how should companies act while standards are still evolving? The speakers brought this back to two simple questions businesses should be asking themselves:
- How do we get to net zero?
- What can our business do for the net zero transition?
Looking beyond your own carbon footprint
Together, these questions encourage businesses to look beyond their own footprint without losing sight of it. Companies need to understand and reduce their own emissions, while also considering the wider contribution they can make and the influence they have within their sector, supply chain or customer base.
The key is that businesses need to do both. Contribution should complement, rather than replace, responsibility for their own emissions.
Navigating an evolving net zero landscape
There are now a growing number of frameworks, methodologies and approaches associated with corporate net zero. As the landscape continues to evolve, the panel emphasised the importance of properly evaluating new ideas rather than assuming every new approach represents progress.
They suggested asking four questions:
- Does it solve a genuine weakness in the current approach?
- Does it build constructively on established carbon accounting principles?
- Does it ultimately lead to greater emissions reductions or credible climate contributions?
- Who is advocating for it, and what incentives sit behind it?
Evolution in standards is necessary, but reinvention for its own sake is not. Asking these questions can help businesses distinguish between what moves the field forward and what simply adds noise.
New tools, frameworks and standards can add value, but not all of them will. It is therefore important to look closely at the thinking behind an approach, who is advocating for it and what incentives may be involved. There is always a risk that new approaches shift attention away from where responsibility sits, rather than helping businesses take meaningful action.
Finding the commercial value in net zero
How do we translate technical conversations into something that resonates with business leaders? One answer suggested by the panel is to frame the transition in terms of the value it can create for the business. Understanding where that value sits can be a meaningful catalyst for change.
An example provided during the session was investment in Scope 3. Supplier decarbonisation can easily be viewed as another cost, but in many cases businesses are indirectly paying for their suppliers’ energy use through the goods and services they purchase. Helping suppliers become more energy efficient can therefore reduce emissions while also creating commercial value across the supply chain.
One speaker highlighted Schneider Electric as an example of a business that has benefited commercially from the transition towards electrification, demonstrating that climate action and business value do not necessarily need to sit in opposition.
Perhaps the next phase of corporate net zero will be defined not by how businesses absorb the cost of transition, but by how effectively they create value through it.
The economics of the transition are changing
In 2015, the Paris Agreement represented an extraordinary level of political consensus around the need for climate action, but a lack of economic frameworks needed to support that ambition. A decade later, that political consensus is arguably more fragile, while the economics of the transition have moved considerably further forward.
Developments in areas such as electrification, renewable energy and digitisation are changing the commercial case for action. Perhaps businesses no longer need to wait for the politics of net zero to become simpler, because the economic case for taking action is becoming stronger in its own right.
So, where is corporate net zero heading?
It’s not disappearing, but maturing.
The next phase is likely to be less about announcing distant commitments and more about demonstrating real reductions, using corporate influence, understanding wider contributions and finding commercial opportunities within the transition.
For businesses, that means moving beyond the question of “What is our net zero target?” and towards more practical questions: What are we doing now? Where can we have the greatest impact? And how can the transition create value for our organisation?