Why set SBTs?

Some of the early adopters of our methods who are setting the first science-based targets for nature have already identified key strengths of SBTN for their business.

Opportunities beyond risk management

“These methods provide value in the form of risk mitigation – identifying risk along the supply chain –  as well as improved reputation, and competitive advantage.” 

Catalyst for change

“This approach is a first step towards a standardization of how nature is integrated into companies’ strategies. It’s an enormous step forward.” 

Measurable benefits

“Having credible nature targets leads to easier access to credit and financing.” 

“[Through setting SBTs for nature] We are planning to save costs due to water use efficiency.”

Raised ambition

“A no conversion commitment is far beyond our current no deforestation commitment and is a huge change that will come through SBTN.”

Interplay with other frameworks

“By doing SBTN you are paving the way for other frameworks – at least from a data perspective, the process is extremely rigorous and science-based.” 

The above feedback was gathered from pioneering companies piloting science-based targets for nature, through workshops, interviews and anonymized surveys.

We have intentionally designed our approach to build on and align to what companies are already doing as part of their sustainability strategy.

We therefore collaborate with, and align to, related frameworks including mandatory reporting requirements such as EU’s CSRD and voluntary disclosure recommendations through the TNFD; ultimately increasing efficiencies for companies.

Some companies might already be setting some type of target, but it is worth asking the following questions:

Are they backed by civil society as a credible approach?

The power of SBTN is that it is a Network, not an organization. And SBTN’s credibility comes from this – it is a coalition of key environmental organizations and is driven by a consensus-led approach among them – rather than led by one organization. The same founding organizations behind SBTi (which are CDP, UN Global Compact, WWF and WRI) are some of the founding partners of SBTN which also includes: Conservation International, UNEP-WCMC, and World Economic Forum. 

Do they provide clarity on how much is enough?

Targets set using SBTN methods are in line with local and global ecological/biophysical limits and account for people’s needs. 

Do they provide a consistent science-based approach?

SBTN’s standardized approach is distinct from other target types because it provides a consistent way to get to the right-sized target. Other target types suggest a direction, but the magnitude may be somewhat arbitrary.

Do the targets cover impacts companies have beyond their direct operations to their upstream activities?

Companies are now realizing that impacts on nature may occur across their value chain, including upstream in the supply chain or downstream during product use and disposal. The SBTN approach ensures that companies look beyond their direct operations, to their upstream value chains where much of their nature impact may exist. SBTN requirements for a value chain assessment–within their direct operations and upstream supply chains–before moving to target-setting ensures that companies base their action strategy on a more comprehensive view of their impacts before moving to implementation. 

Are the targets location specific?

Setting one target for a company’s entire geographic reach will not lead to the right actions in the right places at the right time. For example, water is local, so freshwater science-based targets need to be, too.