Unified climate standards: Why they matter and what we’ve seen in practice
When we work with companies on climate assurance, one message comes through loud and clear: everyone wants clarity. Whether it’s a sustainability manager preparing a report, a CFO signing off on disclosures, or a supplier struggling to meet customer requests, the question is the same: “Which standard should we follow, and how do we make sure we’re doing it right?”
That’s why the recent news of a partnership between ISO and the GHG Protocol is so important. For the first time, two of the world’s most widely used frameworks for greenhouse gas accounting are coming together to build a unified global standard. From our perspective at DNV, this is a big step forward.
Why a unified approach matters
Over the years, we’ve seen how the lack of alignment creates headaches. Different definitions, slightly different boundaries, and sometimes just different terminology leave companies guessing. That uncertainty doesn’t just create extra work; it makes it harder to build trust with stakeholders.
A globally harmonized framework between ISO and the GHG Protocol is critical. It reduces fragmentation, improves comparability, and strengthens trust in emissions disclosures at a time when regulators, investors, and customers are demanding consistency.
Unified standards would mean:
- Climate change mitigation efforts become more transparent and comparable.
- Fewer grey areas when interpreting results.
- Greater confidence in climate claims.
- Easier comparability across industries and countries.
- Strengthens credibility by combining the GHG Protocol’s widespread adoption with ISO’s rigor in assurance.
- No confusion in selecting an appropriate standard.
- The ISO 14068-1 Carbon Neutrality standard becomes easier to understand and apply.
- Different organizations and disclosure platforms can interpret and compare carbon reduction efforts and achievements more consistently.
- Most importantly, companies can spend less time reconciling frameworks and more time acting on the data.
Our experience on the ground
At DNV, we’ve been verifying emissions and climate-related disclosures for decades. As a leading assurance provider, we have extensive experience working with both ISO standards (such as ISO 14064 and 14067) and the GHG Protocol. This dual perspective enables us to help customers navigate requirements and provide robust, credible assurance outcomes.
In practice, both frameworks are valuable. ISO offers structure and auditability, while the GHG Protocol is flexible and widely adopted, particularly in the voluntary market in the US. But when companies try to apply both, we often see confusion. For example:
- Teams ask us which standard “counts more” when presenting results to investors.
- Different functions within the same company interpret assurance findings in different ways.
- Suppliers tell us they receive overlapping requests for data that don’t always line up.
We’ve observed that customers often struggle to interpret assurance findings when ISO and GHG requirements diverge. Questions arise about which standard to prioritize and how to communicate results to stakeholders. A unified standard will help address this complexity and enhance clarity in assurance statements. Harmonization could bring much-needed relief, making Scope 3 data more comparable and actionable.
What it means for industry
Both ISO and GHG frameworks are widely applied across industries, from heavy emitters in energy and manufacturing to service providers in logistics and finance. In heavy industries, emissions data underpins compliance and investment decisions. In consumer-facing sectors, it drives transparency in product footprints and supply chains.
By aligning ISO and GHG guidance, organizations will be able to apply standards more consistently, whether in operational planning, reporting to regulators, or communicating with customers. Unification ensures that emissions accounting is not only technically sound but also practically applicable across sectors and geographies.
The bigger picture: Climate strategy and supply chains
The implications go beyond reporting. Scope 3 emissions, which require collaboration and data sharing across complex supply chains, remain one of the toughest challenges for companies. Harmonized standards will reduce ambiguity, increase supplier engagement, and enhance the credibility of reported Scope 3 reductions, therefore supporting meaningful decarbonization.
When companies can trust their emissions data, they can make stronger decisions about climate change mitigation, both in terms of financial risk and opportunities. Critically, it also means they can use their data to set credible science-based targets with confidence.
Looking ahead
At DNV, we see the ISO–GHG Protocol partnership as a milestone. It may not solve everything overnight, but it’s a strong signal that the market is moving toward clarity and consistency. Our role, as always, is to help companies navigate these changes, validate their approach, verify their data, and make sure assurance outcomes are not just technically correct but also meaningful for decision-making.
Because ultimately, what matters is not just reporting, it’s taking real meaningful action on climate change. And clear, unified standards sets expectations and make those actions increasingly possible.
Thank you to our contributors
This article also benefited from valuable insights from Shruthi Poonacha Bachamanda, Guangyu Wayne Li, and Koichiro Tanabe.
9/11/2025 12:48:00 PM
