Global Sustainability: Where Is the Momentum for Net-Positive?

Net-positive sustainability refers to a transformative approach that aims to minimize harm while actively creating positive environmental, social, and economic impacts.

A prominent example of a net-positive climate strategy is removing more carbon from the atmosphere than is emitted. In essence, going beyond neutralizing carbon emissions.

Some have rightfully asked: But, can you really be net-zero?

The limitations of net-zero targets are becoming increasingly apparent. Net zero often involves balancing emissions by investing in carbon offsets such as sequestration projects to neutralize a company’s carbon footprint.

This approach may not account for historical emissions — the cumulative greenhouse gases a company has released over time — which continue to impact the climate.

Moreover, net-zero strategies can suffer from underestimations, particularly regarding indirect emissions in a company’s value chain i.e. the Scope 3 emissions. Incomplete accounting can significantly underrepresent a company’s true environmental impact.

When you factor in the compounding impact of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the case for neutralizing becomes even weaker! The impacts create a feedback loop where each effect can exacerbate others, leading to accelerated changes in the planet’s systems.

According to climate science, we must not only stop the increase of greenhouse gases but also actively reduce the existing atmospheric concentrations. Merely reaching net-zero emissions will not suffice to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. This reality positions climate-positive initiatives as a desirable pathway.

And thanks to a combination of factors, the net-positive approach is gaining traction.

Considered independently, they are nascent ideas, initiatives in their infancy, and fringe

movements. However, together, they share a common theme and a unified message.

They advocate for going beyond the “do-no-harm” principle.

(1) Contribution claim-making

Contribution claims offer an alternative to compensation claims. Companies should

communicate climate efforts while being cautious not to derail global efforts.

Unlike net-zero and carbon-neutral claims, contribution claims do not focus on individual

achievement of climate goals. Rather, they acknowledge the global nature of climate change

and the need for collective coordination of climate action.

Some helpful resources guiding companies diverging from the compensation-based claim model, include:

• Gold Standard’s Considerations for Credible Claims

• ISEAL Claims Guidance

• South Pole’s proposal for A Paris-aligned corporate claim for Funding Climate Action

(2) Carbon handprint

Carbon handprint shifts the focus from minimizing negative impacts (footprint) to maximizing

positive contributions. A handprint represents a company's actions to improve social and

environmental outcomes through innovation, collaboration, and sustainable practices.

Carbon handprint can also refer to our impact on the carbon footprints of others, particularly in support functions such as finance, marketing and IT.

By extension, opportunities for companies to increase their carbon handprint include any

• partnerships to transform industry sustainability

• support for climate policy and advocacy engagement

• other approaches to corporate impact gifting

The SBTi (Science Based Targets Initiative) provides resources to support the design and

implementation of beyond value chain mitigation (BVCM) strategies.

The ten recommendations of UN HLEG on Net Zero also echo how businesses can go above and beyond in a similar contributory approach of increasing an entity’s carbon handprint.

(3) The expanding definition of additionality

Additionality is a key principle for ensuring a sustainability project's real impact in generating

benefits beyond what would have occurred in its absence.

With origins in carbon markets, the additionality lens now extends beyond environmental

benefits, often measured as lower emissions than would have otherwise not occurred.

This expanding scope includes:

• going above and beyond existing regulatory requirements

• advancing deployment of much-needed technology

• allocating financial capital where it is most needed

• accelerating market demand for sustainable alternatives

• generating community co-benefits and social development

Hence, applying this expanded definition pushes the boundaries in advancing regulatory

frameworks, technology, finance, and markets for sustainable practices and solutions.

(4) The call for a fairer carbon price

Analyzing the economic impacts of decisions in terms of the social cost of carbon (SCC) has its history in policy-making. SCC is used to estimate the damage or the benefit of any action that emits additional carbon dioxide.

The plea extends to businesses to set prices that reflect the true cost of the environmental

impact of their value chain activities. Internal carbon pricing (ICP) is a powerful tool for

businesses to assign a monetary value to carbon emissions. Companies using ICP internalize the cost of environmental damages, thus making informed decisions about investments, operations, and product development that align with long-term sustainability goals.

The SPP (Sustainable Procurement Pledge) exemplifies a compelling application of Carbon

Pricing for Procurement.

(5) Seeing beyond the carbon tunnel vision

The myopic emphasis on carbon reduction has long been challenged in line with the nine

planetary boundaries.

However, the nature-positive movement is changing this. Efforts to integrate natural capital into financial systems (by the TNFD) and to reverse biodiversity loss signal broader engagement in a regenerative economy.

Furthermore, social sustainability is increasingly recognized as a critical aspect of a just global sustainability transition. The formation of the TISFD (Taskforce on Inequality & Financial Disclosures) and SVI’s True & Fair Project seek to embed social and human capital into the present financial value system.

Likewise, guidelines and laws to enforce Labour and Human rights in global value chains are

being developed. The anticipated additional due diligence guidelines on transition plans for EUCSDDD to be published in 2027 and the current OECD Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct exemplify efforts to address social sustainability.

Unconvinced about adopting a net-positive approach?

Governments worldwide are implementing stricter environmental and social laws. Companies that lead on sustainable practices stay ahead of these regulations and benefit from incentive schemes. Even as we see backtracking on climate ambitions in some parts of the world, let us recognize these developments as anecdotal rather than indicative of a broader reversal.

Nonetheless, here are two more reasons underscoring the business case for adopting a net-positive mindset:

• Sustainable procurement and sustainable investment represent the power of markets.

  Investors, business customers, and consumers evaluate investments, vendors, andbrands based on sustainability criteria. Companies that go beyond net-zero differentiate themselves in the marketplace.

  
  

• Sustainable practices offer pragmatic risk management and business resilience strategies. Companies reduce operational risks and costs associated with climate change impacts, such as resource scarcity and supply chain disruptions. For example, local sourcing reduces transport emissions and mitigates delivery delays while empowering local suppliers.

'Net-Positive' equates to 'Going beyond ...'

Net-positive sustainability means businesses aim to leave the world better than they found.

This approach goes beyond regulatory requirements to generate social and environmental benefits.