IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v26y2022i5p1747-1759.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using cumulative carbon budgets and corporate carbon disclosure to inform ambitious corporate emissions targets and long‐term mitigation pathways

Author

Listed:
  • Maida Hadziosmanovic
  • Shannon M. Lloyd
  • Anders Bjørn
  • Raymond L. Paquin
  • Nadine Mengis
  • H. Damon Matthews

Abstract

With increasing pressure for climate action, commitments to setting scientifically supported emissions targets have become more common among firms. The target‐setting methods currently endorsed by the Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) use emission pathways that are aligned with 1.5°C and well‐below 2°C long‐term temperature goals to inform near‐term corporate targets. However, most of these scenarios lead to a temperature overshoot, followed by a return to the temperature goal achieved via net‐negative emissions in the second half of this century. When used to inform near‐term (e.g., 2030) corporate targets, the result is a set of targets that are aligned with an overshoot of a temperature target, with no explicit long‐term commitment to using negative emissions technologies to reverse this. To decrease the risk of this misalignment with the long‐term temperature goal, we propose an alternative approach that derives corporate targets directly from the remaining global cumulative carbon budget. We illustrate this approach using global Scope 1 emissions disclosed by public firms in 2019 to estimate corporate carbon budgets and construct idealized emissions‐reduction pathways that are consistent with the remaining global carbon budget for 1.5°C and well‐below 2°C. While firms, or their sectors, may choose varying mitigation pathways aligned with either global temperature limit, consistency with remaining carbon budgets requires that any delayed mitigation action in the near term is followed by more rapid emissions reductions in subsequent years. This study emphasizes the need for a more precautionary and robust approach to corporate target setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Maida Hadziosmanovic & Shannon M. Lloyd & Anders Bjørn & Raymond L. Paquin & Nadine Mengis & H. Damon Matthews, 2022. "Using cumulative carbon budgets and corporate carbon disclosure to inform ambitious corporate emissions targets and long‐term mitigation pathways," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(5), pages 1747-1759, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:26:y:2022:i:5:p:1747-1759
    DOI: 10.1111/jiec.13322
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13322
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jiec.13322?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernhard Goldhammer & Christian Busse & Timo Busch, 2017. "Estimating Corporate Carbon Footprints with Externally Available Data," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 21(5), pages 1165-1179, October.
    2. Florence Depoers & Thomas Jeanjean & Tiphaine Jérôme, 2016. "Voluntary Disclosure of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Contrasting the Carbon Disclosure Project and Corporate Reports," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(3), pages 445-461, March.
    3. Neumayer, Eric, 2000. "In defence of historical accountability for greenhouse gas emissions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 185-192, May.
    4. Jannik Giesekam & Jonathan Norman & Alice Garvey & Sam Betts-Davies, 2021. "Science-Based Targets: On Target?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    5. Mark Trexler & Auden Schendler, 2015. "Science-Based Carbon Targets for the Corporate World: The Ultimate Sustainability Commitment, or a Costly Distraction?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 19(6), pages 931-933, December.
    6. Anders Bjørn & Shannon M. Lloyd & Matthew Brander & H. Damon Matthews, 2022. "Renewable energy certificates threaten the integrity of corporate science-based targets," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 12(6), pages 539-546, June.
    7. Lasse Ringius & Asbjørn Torvanger & Arild Underdal, 2002. "Burden Sharing and Fairness Principles in International Climate Policy," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 1-22, March.
    8. Richard Heede, 2014. "Tracing anthropogenic carbon dioxide and methane emissions to fossil fuel and cement producers, 1854–2010," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 122(1), pages 229-241, January.
    9. Jayme Walenta, 2020. "Climate risk assessments and science‐based targets: A review of emerging private sector climate action tools," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(2), March.
    10. Florence Depoers & Thomas Jeanjean & Tiphaine Jerome, 2016. "Voluntary Disclosure of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Contrasting the Carbon Disclosure Project and Corporate Reports," Post-Print hal-01735774, HAL.
    11. Thomas P. Lyon & John W. Maxwell, 2011. "Greenwash: Corporate Environmental Disclosure under Threat of Audit," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 3-41, March.
    12. Lena Klaaßen & Christian Stoll, 2021. "Harmonizing corporate carbon footprints," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    13. Wendy Stubbs & Colin Higgins & Markus Milne, 2013. "Why Do Companies Not Produce Sustainability Reports?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(7), pages 456-470, November.
    14. Erin M. Reid & Michael W. Toffel, 2009. "Responding to public and private politics: corporate disclosure of climate change strategies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(11), pages 1157-1178, November.
    15. Erin Marie Reid & Michael W. Toffel, 2008. "Responding to Public and Private Politics: Corporate Disclosure of Climate Change Strategies," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-019, Harvard Business School, revised Jun 2009.
    16. Lyton Chithambo & Ishmael Tingbani & Godfred Afrifa Agyapong & Ernest Gyapong & Isaac Sakyi Damoah, 2020. "Corporate voluntary greenhouse gas reporting: Stakeholder pressure and the mediating role of the chief executive officer," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 1666-1683, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Timo Busch & Matthew Johnson & Thomas Pioch, 2022. "Corporate carbon performance data: Quo vadis?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(1), pages 350-363, February.
    2. Kanwalroop K. Dhanda & Joseph Sarkis & Dileep G. Dhavale, 2022. "Institutional and stakeholder effects on carbon mitigation strategies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 782-795, March.
    3. Lily Hsueh, 2019. "Opening up the firm: What explains participation and effort in voluntary carbon disclosure by global businesses? An analysis of internal firm factors and dynamics," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(7), pages 1302-1322, November.
    4. Olivier Boiral & Marie‐Christine Brotherton & Léo Rivaud & David Talbot, 2022. "Comparing the uncomparable? An investigation of car manufacturers' climate performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 2213-2229, July.
    5. Zahra Borghei, 2021. "Carbon disclosure: a systematic literature review," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(4), pages 5255-5280, December.
    6. Ismail N.B. & Sébastien Alcouffe & Galy N & Ceulemans K, 2020. "The impact of international sustainability initiatives on Life Cycle Assessment voluntary disclosures: The case of France’s CAC40 listed companies," Post-Print hal-03082800, HAL.
    7. Le Luo & Qingliang Tang & Hanlu Fan & Jamie Ayers, 2023. "Corporate carbon assurance and the quality of carbon disclosure," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(1), pages 657-690, March.
    8. Shiro Hori & Sachi Syugyo, 2020. "The function of international business frameworks for governing companies’ climate change-related actions toward the 2050 goals," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 541-557, September.
    9. Shinu Vig, 2024. "Environmental disclosures by Indian companies: role of board characteristics and board effectiveness," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(1), pages 16-31, March.
    10. Antonio J. Mateo‐Márquez & José M. González‐González & Constancio Zamora‐Ramírez, 2021. "The influence of countries' climate change‐related institutional profile on voluntary environmental disclosures," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 1357-1373, February.
    11. Frederik Dahlmann & Layla Branicki & Stephen Brammer, 2017. "‘Carrots for Corporate Sustainability’: Impacts of Incentive Inclusiveness and Variety on Environmental Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 1110-1131, December.
    12. Sadiye Oktay & Serdar Bozkurt & Kübra Yazıcı, 2021. "The Relationship Between Carbon Disclosure Project Scores and Global 500 Companies: A Perspective From National Culture," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, May.
    13. Caroline Flammer & Michael W. Toffel & Kala Viswanathan, 2021. "Shareholder activism and firms' voluntary disclosure of climate change risks," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(10), pages 1850-1879, October.
    14. Adam R. Fremeth & Guy L. F. Holburn & Richard G. Vanden Bergh, 2016. "Corporate Political Strategy in Contested Regulatory Environments," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 272-284, December.
    15. Lyon, Thomas & Lu, Yao & Shi, Xinzheng & Yin, Qie, 2013. "How do investors respond to Green Company Awards in China?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1-8.
    16. Jill Atkins & Federica Doni & Andrea Gasperini & Sonia Artuso & Ilaria Torre & Lorena Sorrentino, 2023. "Exploring the Effectiveness of Sustainability Measurement: Which ESG Metrics Will Survive COVID-19?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 185(3), pages 629-646, July.
    17. Afrifa, Godfred Adjapong & Tingbani, Ishmael & Yamoah, Fred & Appiah, Gloria, 2020. "Innovation input, governance and climate change: Evidence from emerging countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    18. Kira R. Fabrizio & Eun-Hee Kim, 2019. "Reluctant Disclosure and Transparency: Evidence from Environmental Disclosures," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1207-1231, November.
    19. Steve J. Bickley & Alison Macintyre & Benno Torgler, 2021. "Artificial Intelligence and Big Data in Sustainable Entrepreneurship," CREMA Working Paper Series 2021-11, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    20. Ashish Arora & Michelle Gittelman & Sarah Kaplan & John Lynch & Will Mitchell & Nicolaj Siggelkow & Robert J. Carroll & David M. Primo & Brian K. Richter, 2016. "Using item response theory to improve measurement in strategic management research: An application to corporate social responsibility," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 66-85, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:26:y:2022:i:5:p:1747-1759. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.