Amazon has been marked as ‘removed’ from Science-Based Targets initiative’s (SBTi) dashboard for failing follow up its climate pledges with official emission goals for approval by SBTi reviewers.
The e-commerce retailer said it “remains difficult to submit [emission targets for review] in a meaningful and accurate way.”
Out of 5859 companies, the SBTi removed 2619 from its dashboard. Also removed are 14 UK companies including Arm, Mintel, Branston and Capitas Finance.
Earlier this year, the SBTi implemented a policy to flag organisations that had failed to follow up on their initial public climate goal commitment within a 24-month period, whereas previously, the SBTi removed them from its dashboard.
To allow companies to adjust to the new policy, there was a six-month grace period which ended on Monday 31 July.
Commitments made during the grace period that received validated targets before July 31 are listed as “Targets Set” whereas commitments will continue to be listed as “Active” if targets have been submitted within the time frame but are still awaiting target approval.
However, those companies such as Amazon that did not submit targets by July 31 will have their commitment listed as “Commitment Removed” and will continue to be marked this way until they submit and have approved targets for validation.
Subscribe to Sustainability Beat for free
Sign up here to get the latest sustainability news sent straight to your inbox every day.
SBTi said the new policy “makes it clear where companies have committed to set targets but then failed to comply.
“Not only does this increase transparency and accountability around commitments and eventual validation, it acts as a major disincentive for companies to make commitments without taking action,” it added.
While SBTi doesn’t comment on individual businesses, it encourages “any and all companies that are removed to re-engage with the process to set science-based targets for validation as soon as possible.”
Amazon said that in 2020 the retailer committed to setting voluntary targets with SBTi but “since then, requirements for submission changed, and new methodologies have begun to be developed. Amazon is among hundreds of organisations that received an extension on their original deadline to submit due to these ongoing changes.”
“We have continued to work with SBTi throughout this time to determine appropriate submission guidelines and methodologies for complex businesses like Amazon, however it remains difficult for us to submit in a meaningful and accurate way. We will continue to work with SBTi to establish a path forward for submission, and we believe there’s a role to play for organisations like theirs,” it continued.
“We’re also not pulling back or slowing down—in tandem to this ongoing work with SBTi, we’ll also seek to set science-based targets with other organisations and credible third-party validators.
“And, as we’ve done from the beginning, we’ll also continue to work with leaders on our teams and in the climate space to make target-setting tools and standards more available, adaptable, and actionable across multiple industries,” it added.
