The Net Zero Gap:

A Scientific Look at Why Climate Plans Fall Short

As global pressure mounts for corporations, estates, and institutions to act on climate change, many have responded with ambitious “net zero” commitments. But a growing body of evidence shows a significant gap between climate ambition and actual delivery.

This article explores the science, data, and governance failures behind this credibility gap — and what organisations can do to close it.

1. The Rise of Net Zero – and the Risk of Hollow Targets

By 2023, over 5,200 companies representing more than two-thirds of global market capitalisation had made some form of net zero pledge[^1]. These commitments typically aim to balance greenhouse gas emissions with removals by 2050.

However, research by the NewClimate Institute reveals that many such pledges cover only a fraction of a company’s total emissions. A 2022 analysis of 25 major multinationals found that their net-zero targets would only reduce emissions by 40% on average, once accounting for quality, scope, and timing[^2].

2. Why Most Net Zero Plans Are Critically Insufficient

Even where targets exist, several technical issues undermine their credibility:

• Scope 3 Blind Spots: The majority of emissions for most companies fall under Scope 3 (value chain emissions), which are often underreported or excluded from targets[^3].

• Offset Overreliance: Companies frequently use carbon offsetting to meet targets, even though many offset projects (e.g. avoided deforestation or temporary soil carbon storage) lack additionality, permanence, and scientific robustness[^4].

• Governance Gaps: Few firms disclose how transition plans are governed, funded, or audited — raising questions about deliverability and accountability[^5].

These issues were echoed in the Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2023, which concluded that many corporate climate strategies remain “misleading” or “critically insufficient” to align with 1.5°C pathways[^6].

3. Disclosure Frameworks Are Evolving – But Still Maturing

The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) has provided a widely adopted framework for disclosure. However, with the TCFD now integrated into the new International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) framework, disclosure expectations are growing.

ISSB standards (IFRS S1 & S2) require clearer governance, risk management, and financial impacts of climate transition planning[^7]. Yet, adoption is patchy — and many organisations still treat reporting as a compliance exercise, rather than a strategic imperative.

4. What Good Looks Like – and Why It’s Rare

Organisations with credible climate plans typically have:

• Defined and quantified baselines, including Scope 1, 2 and 3

• Interim targets with delivery roadmaps and funding plans

• Integration of climate risk into capital allocation and board governance

• Transparent use of offsetting (if any), with rigorous due diligence on project integrity

• Independent verification or alignment with credible benchmarks (e.g. SBTi, ISSB)

Yet, according to CDP, only 1% of disclosing firms currently meet all 24 key indicators of a credible transition plan[^8].

5. How Resilient Horizons Can Help

At Resilient Horizons, we provide technical and strategic expertise to help close this gap:

• Climate Strategy & Disclosure: We support the creation of climate transition plans that meet ISSB-aligned expectations and stakeholder scrutiny.

• Independent Due Diligence: We assess carbon, nature, and renewable projects to verify assumptions, delivery feasibility, and permanence.

• Green Finance Evaluation: We provide impartial evaluation of carbon-linked investments, ensuring landowners and investors understand real-world risks and returns.

Conclusion

A net zero plan should be more than a headline. The science is clear: climate credibility requires clarity, data, governance, and action.

Organisations that take this seriously will not only protect their reputation but will better manage risk, attract investment, and lead with integrity.

References

[^1]: Net Zero Tracker, 2023. Net Zero Stocktake 2023. https://zerotracker.net

[^2]: NewClimate Institute, 2022. Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2022. https://newclimate.org

[^3]: McKinsey & Company, 2021. Understanding your emissions: The Scope 3 challenge. https://www.mckinsey.com

[^4]: The Guardian, 2023. More than 90% of rainforest carbon offsets by biggest provider are worthless. https://www.theguardian.com

[^5]: Carbon Trust, 2022. Net zero – the state of play. https://carbontrust.com

[^6]: NewClimate Institute, 2023. Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2023. https://newclimate.org

[^7]: IFRS Foundation, 2023. ISSB Issues First Sustainability Disclosure Standards. https://www.ifrs.org

[^8]: CDP, 2023. Are companies developing credible climate transition plans? https://www.cdp.net