Publication Date: July 2026
GHG Framework Developments
Introduction: Evolving GHG Accounting Across Scopes 1, 2 and 3
Greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting is undergoing its most significant update in over a decade, with the GHG Protocol leading a comprehensive revision of its Corporate Standard, Scope 2 Guidance, and Scope 3 Standard.
For anyone trying to keep up with the world of net zero, carbon reporting and sustainability, it has often felt like a moving target. Different frameworks, overlapping guidance and a steady stream of new terminology have left many organisations wondering exactly what they need to do, and when.
The good news is that there are now clear signs that the market is becoming more coordinated, with greater alignment and standardisation emerging across carbon management and reporting requirements.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the latest changes to greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting and reporting. In this update, we will explain what these changes are, why they are happening, and most importantly, what they could mean for your organisation.
These updates, expected to continue through 2026 and finalisation anticipated around the end of 2027, are designed to increase the accuracy, comparability and auditability of emissions reporting across all scopes. In the meantime, the implications are already being felt in the market as changes align.
For organisations, this marks a decisive shift away from high-level, estimate-based reporting toward granular, high quality, evidence-based carbon accounting.
In Scope 1 (direct emissions), proposals mirror broader changes by encouraging clearer data classification and verification.
In Scope 2 (purchased energy), recent consultation proposals emphasise more precise matching of electricity consumption with generation, potentially on an hourly and location basis, alongside stricter rules on renewable energy claims. [ghgprotocol.org], [viewpoint.pwc.com]
One of the most material areas of change is occurring in Scope 3, which often represents the majority of a company’s footprint. Ongoing revisions are expected to introduce stronger requirements for data quality, boundary setting and transparency, such as disclosing the proportion of emissions based on primary data versus secondary (estimated) data, with expectations that companies significantly increase coverage with proposals suggesting coverage threshold cited as 95%.. [esgtoday.com].
Alongside these changes, the introduction of the Land Sector and Removals Standard (LSRS) provides, for the first time, a structured framework for accounting for land-based emissions and carbon removals, raising the bar for credible net-zero claims. [ghgprotocol.org]
Collectively, these developments align closely with evolving disclosure frameworks such as the ongoing updates to ISO carbon and climate standards, ISSB and ESRS, which are converging toward a more consistent, globally interoperable reporting baseline. [ifrs.org]
Key Developments
A critical shift underpinning market changes is the continued evolution of Scope 3 accounting and reporting, driven by GHG Protocol consultations and rising investorand regulatory expectations.
Accounting & Measurement Modernisation
Scope 2 consultation (closed; under review)
Proposals include tighter rules for market-based energy claims and more granular, time-matched energy accounting Further reading: GHG Protocol Scope 2 consultation overview
Scope 3 standard revision underway –
focusing on data quality, boundary definition and reporting transparency. Further reading: GHG Protocol Scope 3 progress update
Greater disaggregation of emissions data –
increased visibility of how emissions are calculated (activity-based vs spend-based)
Shift Toward Higher Quality Data
- Accelerating move from secondary (average-based) data to primary, supplier-specific data, improving accuracy and decision-making
- Increasing expectation that organisations disclose data sources, quality, and verification status
New Standards and Methodologies
- Land Sector & Removals Standard (LSRS)rollout introduces formal requirements for accounting for land use emissions and carbon removals. Further reading: GHG Protocol LSRS overview
- Increasing clarity on avoided emissions, removals, and double counting risks.
Framework Alignment
- Increasing alignment pressures between GHG Protocol, ISO standards, SBTi, ISSB and ESRS to enable consistent reporting and reduce duplication [ifrs.org]
- Movement toward a more, interoperable reporting frameworks across jurisdictions
Key Themes Emerging
- Improved accuracy, transparency and auditability of Scope 3 reporting
- Stronger expectations on supplier engagement and data quality
- Increased scrutiny on how emissions reductions are calculated and claimed across value chains
- Transition from narrative disclosures to evidence-based reporting
What to Watch
- Increasing expectation for auditable transition plans with full Scope 3 integration
- Expansion of sector-specific requirements aligned to updated GHG standards
- Continued tightening of data quality thresholds and reporting boundaries
- Growing reliance on GHG Protocol principles including within frameworks such as CSRD, ISSB and global disclosures
Implications for Your Organisation
- Increased supply chain pressure to provide good quality carbon data
- Increased requirement for audit-ready data, controls and governance structures to be in place.
- Need to align methodologies and reporting with evolving Scope 3 and removals standards
- Shift from target-setting →delivery of funded, time-bound decarbonisation plans
Scope 3 will become:
- More auditable
- Less flexibility in methodology selection as standards tighten
- Increasingly dependent on supplier-level (primary) data
How Can Auditel Help:
- Provide expert guidance throughout your net zero journey, helping to de-risk carbon compliance and strengthen market positioning
- Ensure data availability and quality are sufficient to meet both compliance and reporting expectations
- Support supplier engagement and the development of primary data collection systems
- Enable more robust, category-level emissions modelling
- Establish clear, documented methodologies and audit trails for reporting
- Identify and prioritise decarbonisation opportunities across procurement, operations, behaviour, and capital projects
Risk of Not Acting Now:
- Compliance risk as emerging regulations and disclosure frameworks take effect
- Reputational risk from unsubstantiated or weakly supported claims
- Commercial risk, particularly where customers require verified carbon data for tenders, bids, and frameworks
Bottom Line
- The Scope 3 consultation signals a likely shift from “estimated selective reporting” to needing defensible, high quality data driven accounting across the value chain.
- Supply chain engagement, data quality and methodological rigour will become the defining challenges in carbon reporting.
- Organisations that act early are likely to gain a competitive advantage, while those that delay risk developing significant capability gaps across reporting, supply chain engagement, and data quality
