CORPORATE ACTION → TARGET SETTING
Target Setting
Making commitments that are credible, achievable, and grounded in science.
Corporate Sustainability Journey
In 30 Seconds
Corporate sustainability targets have proliferated – net zero by 2050, carbon neutral by 2030, nature positive by 2030. But many lack credibility. The gap between announced targets and actual delivery is widening.
The challenge: Targets set without understanding what's physically possible, what the business can actually deliver, or how to get there. The result: commitments that erode trust when they're missed.
The opportunity: Science-based targets (SBTi, SBTN) provide rigorous frameworks that connect corporate ambition to planetary limits. They're becoming the credibility standard.
The Target Landscape
Not all targets are created equal. Understanding the hierarchy helps separate credible commitments from vague aspirations.
Science-Based (Validated)
Highest credibilityExternally validated against planetary limits
SBTi-validated climate targets, SBTN nature targets
Science-Aligned (Self-Declared)
Medium-High credibilityFollowing methodology but not externally validated
Using SBTi methodology without submission
Quantified Commitments
Medium credibilitySpecific numbers without scientific grounding
"50% reduction by 2030", "carbon neutral by 2025"
Aspirational Statements
Low credibilityDirectional without specific metrics
"Net zero by 2050", "nature positive"
Key insight: External validation is becoming table stakes. Investors, customers, and regulators increasingly distinguish between validated and self-declared targets.
SBTi: Climate Targets
The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) has become the gold standard for corporate climate targets. Over 4,000 companies have committed, with 2,500+ having validated targets.
What SBTi Requires
- Near-term targets: 5-10 year targets covering Scope 1, 2, and usually Scope 3
- Long-term targets: Net zero by 2050 or sooner with 90%+ absolute reduction
- 1.5°C alignment: Targets must align with limiting warming to 1.5°C
- Annual reporting: Progress must be disclosed publicly
- Revalidation: Targets must be updated every 5 years
The Process
- 1. Commit: Submit commitment letter (appears on SBTi website)
- 2. Develop: 24 months to develop and submit targets
- 3. Submit: Complete target submission form with supporting data
- 4. Validate: SBTi reviews and validates (or requests changes)
- 5. Communicate: Announce validated targets publicly
Scope 3: The Hard Part
For most companies, Scope 3 (value chain emissions) represents 70-90% of their footprint. SBTi requires Scope 3 targets if these emissions exceed 40% of total. This is where target-setting gets difficult:
- • Data challenges: Supply chain emissions are hard to measure accurately
- • Influence limits: You don't control your suppliers' operations
- • Category complexity: 15 Scope 3 categories, each with different approaches
This is where understanding your value chain (L2-L3 in our model) becomes essential.
SBTN: Nature Targets
The Science Based Targets Network (SBTN) extends the science-based approach to nature – biodiversity, land, water, and ocean systems. This is the emerging frontier.
The SBTN Framework
AR3T Action Framework
- Avoid – Prevent new impacts
- Reduce – Minimise existing impacts
- Regenerate – Restore ecosystems
- Transform – System-level change
Current Status
- • Land targets: Available for validation
- • Freshwater targets: Available for validation
- • Biodiversity targets: In development
- • Ocean targets: In development
Why Nature Targets Matter
Climate and nature are interconnected. You can't achieve net zero without addressing land use. Nature-based solutions are part of most credible transition pathways. TNFD is driving disclosure; SBTN provides the target-setting framework.
Early Mover Advantage
SBTN is where SBTi was 5 years ago. Companies setting nature targets now are building capability ahead of regulatory requirements and stakeholder expectations. The learning curve is steep – starting early provides advantage.
The Credibility Gap
The gap between announced targets and credible delivery plans is a growing problem. Stakeholders are increasingly sceptical of corporate climate commitments.
Common Problems
- • Targets set by PR/comms without operational input
- • No pathway analysis before commitment
- • Over-reliance on offsets vs actual reduction
- • Scope 3 targets without supply chain engagement
- • Net zero dates chosen for optics, not feasibility
What Credibility Requires
- • Pathway analysis before target announcement
- • Capital allocation aligned with targets
- • Governance and accountability structures
- • Interim milestones with progress tracking
- • Transparent reporting on progress and gaps
A target without a transition plan is a wish.
That's why target-setting and transition planning must happen together – not sequentially.
Targets Need System Understanding
Credible targets require understanding what's physically possible. That means connecting corporate ambition to planetary and landscape realities.
L1: Planetary Foundations
Science-based targets are grounded in planetary boundaries and carbon budgets
L2: Landscapes & Jurisdictions
Scope 3 targets require understanding supply chain geographies and contexts
L3: Ecosystem Services
Nature targets connect to specific ecosystem dependencies and impacts
L4: Policy & Governance
Targets must align with disclosure frameworks (CSRD, TCFD, CDP)
This is why we start with system understanding. A company that knows its landscape context, ecosystem dependencies, and value chain realities can set targets that are ambitious AND achievable.
The Pandion View
We believe targets should be set with the end in mind. Not “what sounds good” but “what can we actually deliver, and how?” That means doing the pathway work before making public commitments.
The best targets are boring. They're not PR announcements – they're operational commitments with clear pathways, interim milestones, and accountability structures. That's what builds credibility.
As a hybrid professional, we help clients navigate the target-setting process with eyes open. We connect the ambition to the reality – ensuring targets are both meaningful AND achievable.