ISO 14060: Orbis Advisory's Response to the Draft Net Zero Standard
Orbis Advisory responded to the recent consultation on the new Net Zero Standard released by the International Standards Organisation (ISO). Here is what you need to know:
25 August 2026
Authors
Kieran Elliff
Principal ConsultantKieran@orbisadvisory.com
Zac Rabanal-Hunt
Associate ConsultantZac@orbisadvisory.comWhat is ISO 14060?
ISO 14060 is a new draft standard that sets out the requirements for organisations to plan, claim, and communicate progress towards net zero. It applies broadly to businesses, partnerships, universities and similar organisations and, in conjunction with ISO 14012, to financial institutions involved in financing activities.
How does this standard relate to the GHG Protocol and SBTi?
The GHG Protocol still sets the underlying framework for how a corporate carbon footprint is prepared, under its Scope 1, 2, and 3 categories. ISO 14060 includes the guidance on how the governance of this footprint is prepared.
The Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi) remains the leading global validator of net zero targets. ISO 14060 sets the principles for how these targets and underlying climate transition plans should be integrated within business practices, for example by defining the appropriate level of board involvement within an organisation’s net zero strategy.
In a nutshell, ISO14060 sets the procedures for an organisation’s net zero strategy, right from its GHG Protocol-aligned baseline carbon footprint, through to the preparation of a robust climate transition plan and submission of targets to the SBTi, and the annual governance and improvements past this point.
Why does a standard like this matter for the market?
In some regions, net zero claims have proliferated faster than the assurance mechanisms needed to check them, whereas in others, claims have been withdrawn due to fears of greenwashing or through limited awareness of what the claims mean in practice. In both cases, this leaves investors, regulators, and customers with little consistent basis for comparison and devalues the genuine leadership shown by organisations responding to the climate crisis. A widely adopted ISO standard offers a shared reference point that can reduce accusations of greenwashing, support credible benchmarking across sectors, and give finance and procurement teams more confidence when pricing transition risk or setting supplier requirements. For organisations that get ahead of it, early alignment with ISO 14060 could become a differentiator in tenders, ratings, and access to green finance.
What claims does the standard allow? The standard defines four claims an organisation can make:
Net zero aspiration - the organisation has started on the net zero alignment process and will set net zero targets and develop a transition plan
Net zero aligned transition plan - the organisation has set net zero targets and developed a transition plan and commits to its implementation.
Net zero aligned progress - the organisation is making progress on the pathway to net zero, and is meeting its interim targets (or taking remedial action)
Net zero achievement - the organisation has achieved net zero and is committed to maintaining that status
As part of the public consultation, Orbis Advisory submitted six technical comments, summarised below.
1. Near term target coverage must align with the final net zero target.
The draft standard allows organisations to exclude activities from its Scope 3 short-term target if they are not deemed ‘significant’
Our view is that organisations should focus on their most significant emissions sources but should not lose sight of the full picture, especially if ‘insignificant’ activities become a future risk.
We proposed that interim targets include all activities that generate emissions in an organisation
2. Intensity targets should remain available alongside absolute targets.
The draft standard only allows net zero targets based on absolute reduction
Our view is that this penalises smaller companies that could grow substantially before a net zero year, with the bar for residual emissions scaling proportionally to company size
We proposed permitting economic intensity-based targets across both short-term and long-term horizons, with required percentage reductions higher than under absolute targets.
3. Serviced emissions requirements outpace methodological maturity.
The draft standard sets expectations on companies to include serviced emissions within their targets. For professional services companies, these are the emissions generated by the clients they serve because of the services that the firm provides to them.
Our view is that calculating serviced emissions currently carries a high risk of uncertainty and has no credible standardised methodology.
We proposed changing the terminology from ‘companies shall’ to ‘companies may’ to allow this as an optional disclosure category.
4. Net zero achievement must be unambiguous.
The draft standard defines net zero in terms of ‘organisational emissions’.
Our view is that ‘organisational’ has been used to date to include only Scope 1 emissions, or Scope 1 or Scope 2 emissions, or all of Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions. Referring only to ‘organisational’ creates uncertainty about how net zero may be interpreted..
We proposed changing the target wording of net zero in relation to Scope 1, 2 & 3 emissions. This change will mitigate greenwashing risk by using widely used terminology, aligning to the target wording for SBTi targets, and confirming the scope of net zero claims.
5. The treatment of missed targets and carbon credits needs clarifying.
The draft standard allows for carbon offsets to be used as a ‘carbon cost’ if interim targets are missed
Our view is that carbon offsets should not be used until the net zero target year to balance residual emissions. Embedding carbon offsets within the interim target process may be seen as an escape route for companies that have not executed their transition plan successfully.
We proposed removing the necessity for missed interim targets to require a carbon offset purchase.
6. Remediation planning currently covers Scope 1 overshoots only.
The draft standard includes guidance on what companies should do if they do not meet their Scope 1 interim target
Our view is that, whilst this guidance is good, there is not equivalent guidance for companies that may overshoot their Scope 2 or Scope 3 targets.
We proposed including similar remediation planning for companies that miss their interim Scope 2 and Scope 3 targets.
We will continue to monitor the ISO 14060 standard development, and the separate collaboration between ISO and the GHG Protocol to prepare a single standard for preparing a carbon footprint.
If you have any questions or would like to speak with one of our experts in carbon accounting and transition planning, please reach out directly with the contact details provided above.
