A closed loop, not a single sign-off.
V2.0 turns target-setting into a repeating cycle. Validation is now one stage in a loop that includes annual reporting, possible spot and focus checks, and a formal End-of-cycle Assessment that feeds straight into your next validation.
How V2.0 decides whether falling short is acceptable.
V2.0 accepts that some emissions can't be cut on schedule for reasons outside a company's control. So progress is judged on a best-efforts basis — did you deploy every lever you could, and manage what you couldn't? Three defined terms carry the weight.
A best-efforts basis is a level of effort shown through implementing “all actions within a company's control or influence that are necessary and appropriate” to implement its targets — including identifying, reporting and actively managing material dependencies and associated risks.
Source: CNZS V2.0 — Glossary, “Best efforts”You are expected to take all relevant actions within your control or influence to deliver targets. What sits outside that is a dependency — an external condition “not fully within the company's direct control”, such as the readiness of mitigation technologies, supply-chain capacity, or enabling policy and market incentives. Companies that apply the levers they do control, and act credibly to overcome barriers, may keep progressing — even with a gap.
Source: CNZS V2.0 — §B.4 & Glossary, “Dependency”Best efforts is not a free pass. It does not cover a shortfall caused by cost alone, internal preference, or procurement convenience — those are within your control. Nor does simply declaring a dependency discharge the duty: dependencies must be identified, reported and actively managed. A gap with no evidence of levers pulled, and no credible action to overcome barriers, is not best efforts.
What it means to “report a barrier” — and what counts.
When progress falls short, V2.0 requires you to explain why in your reporting. This is the mechanism that makes best efforts auditable.
A barrier is “a factor or condition that inhibits or delays a company's progress toward its targets.” Barriers may be internal or external, are expected to be actively managed or mitigated, and may include structural constraints.
Source: CNZS V2.0 — Glossary, “Barrier”What “reporting a barrier” actually requires
In the reporting cycle following the End-of-cycle Assessment, for each affected target you must:
Structural constraints and enabling actions do not change the progress figure itself, but they inform how progress is described in public reporting — and they are the evidence base for a best-efforts judgement.
The most defensible barriers are structural constraints: external conditions that materially limit your options — infrastructure, technological maturity, regulation, market structure, or supply. The Standard is explicit that they “do not include internal preferences, procurement choices, or cost considerations alone.” A barrier framed around price or preference will not be accepted as a structural constraint.
Source: CNZS V2.0 — Glossary & C23.1 (barriers reported under C37.8)Acceptable: “We could not electrify three sites because grid connections were unavailable in the timeframe (infrastructure constraint, evidenced). We brought forward on-site generation and lodged connection applications.” → a substantiated barrier with managing actions.
Not acceptable: “Low-carbon inputs were more expensive, so we kept buying conventional.” → cost alone is not a structural constraint, and no levers were shown.
Falling short with best efforts ≠ falling short without.
A gap is not automatically a failure. What the End-of-cycle Assessment tests is whether the gap is backed by genuine best efforts.
You may keep progressing
- You applied the levers within your control or influence.
- You took credible action to overcome barriers and reported them.
- You may set new targets and continue toward net-zero into the next cycle.
Your recognised status is affected
- No evidence of levers pulled or barriers managed.
- Expect SBTi follow-up, and your recognised status can be affected.
- The precise consequences depend on the forthcoming Assurance Manual.
The minimum-progress criteria that determine whether a company can set new targets after its first V2.0 cycle will be set out in the forthcoming SBTi Assurance Manual. Until it is published, the exact bar — and the precise consequences of a non-best-efforts gap — are not yet final. Treat any specific threshold as indicative.
Source: CNZS V2.0 — §B.4 (Assurance Manual forthcoming)V1 → V2 comparison (direct quotes) & references
| Version 1.3.1 | Version 2.0 |
|---|---|
| “No formal mechanism to substantiate performance against targets.”Transition Guide, p.19 | “…undergo an End-of-Cycle assessment validation against targets at the end of each target cycle.”Transition Guide, p.19 (Ch.5) |
| “…report progress against all validated targets on an annual basis.”Transition Guide, p.21 (C31) | “…report progress and barriers to progress for all validated targets…”Transition Guide, p.21 (C36) |