How to Set a Science-Based Net-Zero Target (SBTi) for an Indian Company
A step-by-step guide to setting a science-based near-term and net-zero target under the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) for Indian companies, including FLAG guidance for businesses with agricultural or land-based supply chains.
What does it take to set a science-based net-zero target?
A science-based net-zero target under SBTi requires two linked commitments: a near-term target (5-10 years, covering Scope 1, 2 and material Scope 3) and a long-term net-zero target (typically to 2050) requiring at least a 90% absolute emissions cut before using removals for the remainder. Companies with significant agricultural or land-based supply chains must also set a separate FLAG target covering land-sector emissions and removals.
"Net-zero" has become one of the most claimed and least verified terms in corporate sustainability. The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) exists to fix that — it is the dominant global framework for validating that a stated net-zero target is actually consistent with climate science, not just a marketing commitment.
Why "science-based" is a specific, checkable claim
An SBTi-validated target must meet defined criteria — a company cannot simply declare "net-zero by 2050" and expect it to carry the same weight as a validated target. The distinction matters increasingly to investors, lenders and large customers who now ask specifically whether a target is SBTi-validated, not just whether one exists.
5–10 years
near-term target horizon — Scope 1, 2 and material Scope 3
90%+
absolute emissions cut required before net-zero target is met
FLAG track
separate land-based target for agriculture and forestry-linked companies
Step 1: build the emissions inventory first
A target is only as credible as the inventory behind it. This means a full Scope 1, 2 and 3 accounting exercise — see our companion guide on GHG accounting for Indian companies for how to build that foundation. Without this, target-setting is guesswork.
Step 2: determine if Scope 3 and FLAG apply
- Scope 3 threshold. If Scope 3 emissions are 40% or more of total emissions — true for most companies with significant purchased goods, agricultural inputs or logistics — a Scope 3 target is mandatory, not optional, under SBTi's near-term criteria.
- FLAG applicability. Companies in food production, agriculture, forestry, or with agricultural commodities as a material input (a food processor sourcing potatoes, palm oil, dairy or similar) fall under FLAG and must set a distinct land-sector target alongside their standard target, because deforestation, land-use change and soil carbon behave differently from energy-related emissions.
Step 3: set the near-term target
Near-term targets are set against a defined base year and must reduce absolute emissions (or, in specific cases, emissions intensity) along a pathway consistent with 1.5°C. In practice this means:
- Selecting a base year with reliable data.
- Modelling a reduction trajectory using SBTi's sector-specific tools where available.
- Committing to specific interim milestones, not just an end-state number.
Step 4: set the long-term net-zero target
The net-zero target requires at least a 90% absolute reduction across the value chain by the target year (usually 2050), with any remaining residual emissions — the last 10% or less that cannot feasibly be eliminated — addressed through permanent carbon removals, not conventional avoidance credits.
| Target type | Horizon | Scope coverage | Role of carbon credits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Near-term | 5–10 years | Scope 1, 2, and Scope 3 if material | None — reduction only |
| FLAG (if applicable) | Aligned with near-term/net-zero | Land-based emissions and removals | Insetting-style interventions can count if properly documented |
| Net-zero | ~2050 | All scopes, ≥90% reduction required | Permanent removals for the final ≤10% residual only |
Offsets are not a shortcut
SBTi's rules exist specifically to prevent companies from using purchased credits to claim progress they haven't actually made. Reduction has to happen in the value chain first — credits and removals are for what is genuinely left over, not a substitute for the harder work.
Step 5: validate, disclose and keep it current
SBTi requires periodic reporting on progress and revalidation as circumstances change (mergers, major supply chain shifts, updated science). Pair this with BRSR or CDP disclosure so the same numbers tell one consistent story across every audience.
A realistic sequence
- Build the full Scope 1/2/3 inventory.
- Determine Scope 3 materiality and FLAG applicability.
- Model and commit to a near-term target.
- Set the long-term net-zero target with an honest residual-emissions plan.
- Submit for SBTi validation and disclose transparently thereafter.
Carbon Credit Consulting helps Indian companies build GHG inventories, set SBTi-aligned targets and design credible net-zero roadmaps — including FLAG-track targets for agriculture-linked supply chains. Explore our ESG, BRSR reporting & net-zero strategy service, or talk to us about your target.
Frequently asked questions
A science-based target is an emissions-reduction goal that aligns with what climate science says is needed to limit global warming, generally to well below 2 degrees Celsius and pursuing 1.5 degrees, as defined and validated by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi). It differs from a voluntary pledge in that it must meet specific quantitative criteria and is independently reviewed before validation.
A near-term target covers emissions reductions over the next 5-10 years and must cover both Scope 1 and 2, plus Scope 3 if it is 40% or more of total emissions. A net-zero target is a longer-term commitment, typically to 2050, requiring at least a 90% absolute reduction in emissions across all scopes before using any removals to neutralise the small residual that cannot be eliminated.
FLAG (Forest, Land and Agriculture) guidance is a separate SBTi target-setting track for companies with significant land-based emissions or removals — this includes food, agriculture, forestry and companies with agricultural raw materials in their supply chain. FLAG-covered companies must set a distinct land-based target alongside their standard energy/industry target, because land-sector emissions and removals behave differently and follow different accounting rules.
Only for the small residual emissions that remain after at least a 90% reduction across the value chain — carbon credits (called removals at that stage) cannot substitute for the reduction itself. Along the way to net-zero, SBTi also allows Beyond Value Chain Mitigation, meaning finance for external emission-reduction projects, as an encouraged but non-substitutive complement to a company's own reduction pathway.
About the author
Carbon Credit Consulting
Carbon advisory team
The Carbon Credit Consulting advisory team writes on India’s carbon markets — CCTS, CBAM, offset projects, GHG accounting and ESG/BRSR — turning fast-moving rules into practical guidance for businesses, exporters and FPOs.
- CCTS & CBAM advisory
- GHG Protocol & ISO 14064
- Verra & Gold Standard project experience
Need help with esg, brsr & net-zero?
Disclosure and a credible path to net zero.
Related articles
GHG Accounting 101: Scope 1, 2 and 3 Emissions for Indian Companies
A plain-English guide to greenhouse gas accounting under the GHG Protocol — what Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions actually mean, why the distinction matters for BRSR and net-zero targets, and how Indian companies should build a credible inventory.
Read articleWhy Your Emission Factors May Be Wrong: Bottom-Up vs Top-Down GHG Accounting
Almost every corporate carbon number is an activity figure multiplied by an emission factor — and emission factors are assumptions, sometimes built on very thin evidence. Here is how to tell which of yours are load-bearing, and what to do about the weak ones.
Read articlePotato Processing and Carbon Credits: A Scope 3 Emissions Perspective
Why potato processing sits inside the Scope 3 footprint of food and beverage companies, where those emissions actually come from, and how carbon credits and farmer-level interventions fit into a credible reduction plan.
Read article