From ambition to action on ongoing emissions

For those who don't have time to watch the full recording, we summarise the main points discussed by Alice Farrelly from Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), Owen Hewlett, CTO at Gold Standard, and Dan Magrath, Head of Corporate Best Practice at Gold Standard, including how organisations can approach Ongoing Emissions Responsibility (OER) in practice.

Rethinking the role of climate action

As organisations make progress towards their climate targets, even the most ambitious decarbonisation pathways will leave ongoing emissions for many years to come. How should organisations take responsibility for those emissions while continuing to reduce them?

That was the central question explored during the webinar.

OER is not a substitute for decarbonisation

OER is intended to complement, not replace, science-based emissions reduction targets. Organisations must continue to reduce their emissions in line with a credible pathway to net zero. However, they should also recognise that the emissions that remain during that transition still contribute to climate change and consume the global carbon budget.

OER provides a framework for recognising responsibility for ongoing emissions, alongside internal decarbonisation activities. As Farrelly explained, the concept has evolved from earlier work on Beyond Value Chain Mitigation (BVCM), aiming to enable companies to begin addressing their ongoing emissions, demonstrate accountability, and act credibly. OER seeks to provide organisations with greater structure, recognition, and clarity around the actions they are already taking or could take to support global climate action.

SBTi's CNZS 2.0 introduces three recognition levels - Engaged, Advanced and Leadership - to reflect the different stages at which organisations may take responsibility for their ongoing emissions. The framework evolved through consultation, in response to concerns that the gap between initial participation and full leadership was too large.

The entry level is intended to encourage broad participation and help unlock significant climate finance, while the higher levels recognise increasingly comprehensive action. Magrath welcomed the tiered approach as a practical way for organisations to begin at an accessible level, progress over time and gain recognition for actions they may already be taking.

Moving beyond debates about individual mechanisms

Climate discussions are often reduced to debates about which mechanism organisations should use, such as, should an organisation invest in carbon abatement, nature protection, advocacy or a combination?

The webinar suggested a more useful question: how can organisations take meaningful responsibility for their ongoing emissions through activities that support their climate goals? Organisations can then select the mechanisms most likely to deliver these objectives effectively and credibly.

It’s important to consider the broader context of climate actions. Carbon credits can support measurable mitigation, but they often also generate additional benefits, eg., for nature, water, livelihoods and adaptation. This broader perspective creates opportunities for linking mechanisms to stated goals, enabling clearer articulation of contributions and stronger recognition of action.

This moves the conversation away from whether a single mechanism is acceptable and towards which actions are most relevant, credible and impactful in a particular context.

A flexible framework

The webinar also explored how OER can be adapted to different sectors, business models and levels of climate ambition.

OER is not tied to a single type of climate intervention. Depending on their circumstances and objectives, organisations may consider activities such as:

• Research and development into emerging solutions
• Capacity building
• Carbon credits to support measurable mitigation
• Policy advocacy
• Adaptation, resilience, loss and damage
• Carbon removal solutions offtake agreements

For some companies, the priority may be on removing barriers to near-term decarbonisation or building solutions for long-term decarbonisation by investing in technologies, infrastructure or capacity building. For others, it may be more appropriate to deliver near-term climate impact through nature-based solutions or other forms of direct global mitigation.

The important point is that there is no single pathway that will work for every company. OER is a framework that enables organisations to identify where they can make the most meaningful contribution while responding to their specific risks and opportunities. The right mix should be guided by each company’s circumstances, objectives and ability to act.

Pricing responsibility meaningfully

Hewlett emphasised the importance of putting a meaningful price on ongoing emissions. This should influence decision-making and encourage organisations to consider the consequences of continuing emissions.

The webinar explored the difference between a traditional tonne-for-tonne approach and a money-per-tonne approach. Under the latter, a company calculates its ongoing emissions and applies a meaningful carbon price. The resulting funds can then support a portfolio of credible climate actions.

This approach is designed to influence business decisions. It also creates greater flexibility. A company may choose to support high-impact activities or invest in interventions that do not immediately generate measurable emission reductions but are important to future decarbonisation.

This retains a clear connection between emissions and accountability while allowing organisations to support the actions most relevant to their circumstances.

Working with value chain partners

The webinar also explored the potential for shared responsibility across value chains. Scope 3 emissions are often connected to multiple companies, which creates both complexity and an opportunity for collaboration. Sharing responsibility can help reduce costs, encourage collaboration and knowledge sharing, and support collective action across supply chains. This will be further developed with additional guidance expected, but the principle is clear: organisations do not need to address every challenge in isolation.

Starting with the fundamentals

One of the strongest messages from the webinar was that organisations do not need to wait for every uncertainty to be resolved before they begin.

Organisations can start by:

• Understanding their emissions
• Developing a robust greenhouse gas inventory
• Setting and acting on science-based targets
• Assessing the scale of their ongoing emissions
• Considering what level of contribution may be realistic
• Identifying the most relevant climate actions to support their climate strategy
• Building a business case for action

This is not simply a technical exercise. It is also a strategic one.

Farrelly highlighted the importance of understanding what a company wants to achieve through its OER strategy. A food and beverage company may want to support adaptation and resilience in its supply chain. A technology company may be interested in supporting carbon removals or demonstrating climate leadership. A company in a hard-to-abate sector may prioritise research, development or policy engagement.

These priorities can help shape the business case for action and build leadership support for an OER budget.

Communicating with integrity

The webinar also addressed the need for more careful climate claims. Organisations should avoid suggesting that interventions have erased or counterbalanced their emissions. Instead, communications should explain what the company is doing, why it is doing it, what remains unresolved and how the action supports its wider decarbonisation strategy. This approach is more credible and more likely to build trust with stakeholders.

Making existing action more visible

Many organisations are already investing in research and development, capacity building, policy engagement, carbon credits, adaptation or other climate-related activities. A key opportunity presented by OER is to bring these activities together within a recognised framework.  This can help organisations understand and communicate the contribution they are making, gain recognition for their actions, and build a stronger business case for further action.

OER is an opportunity

OER does not require every company to follow an identical path. It provides a structure for organisations to take responsibility, make informed choices and support meaningful climate action in ways that reflect their circumstances.

The opportunity is to move beyond polarised debates and focus on what matters most: credible action, real impact and the continued reduction of emissions.

More information

Read Gold Standard’s report, Ongoing Emissions: Taking Responsibility, to explore how organisations can establish an OER budget, build a high-quality portfolio of climate action and communicate their contribution with integrity.

Gold Standard is also inviting companies with credible climate targets to join our new Ongoing Emissions Responsibility (OER) Working Group. The Working Group will bring together a small cohort of companies to explore how OER can work in practice. If this is relevant to your company and you would like to contribute to this work, please register your interest.