A new study, titled “Limited Accountability and Awareness of Corporate Emissions Target Outcomes” explores the question of accountability in relation to corporate emissions targets. The researchers examined a sample of 1,041 firms collectively representing 2.5 billion tons of GHG emissions in 2020, which is ~5% of annual global emissions. A total of 1,041 firms had emissions targets ending in 2020, of which 88 (9%) failed and 320 (31%) disappeared.
This study underscores a major issue with corporate climate commitments: accountability and impact. A few key takeaways:
Corporate emissions targets may not be reliable – The fact that 31% of firms “disappeared” from tracking suggests a lack of transparency, and without full Scope 3 inclusion, reported progress is incomplete at best.
Minimal consequences for failure – No significant market reaction or environmental score downgrade when targets are missed means there’s little external pressure on companies to follow through. Meanwhile, the initial announcement of a target is rewarded, creating incentives for greenwashing.
Selective media coverage – Only a handful of failing firms were covered by the press, which means public accountability is limited. If failure doesn’t generate reputational risk, companies may not feel compelled to act.
This suggests that voluntary corporate commitments alone won’t be enough to drive meaningful emissions reductions. Stronger regulatory frameworks, mandatory Scope 3 reporting, and financial incentives for real progress are likely needed.
Download the report here.
Authors: The academics include Shirley Simiao Lu (Harvard Business School), Shawn King (University of California, Berkeley, Haas School of Business) and Xiaoyan Jiang (Harvard Business School).
