"Is it certified?" asks four different bodies at once

One question always comes up: "is that certified?"

The reason it slides off is that it is looking for a single stamp. What exists is layers.

Four layers

The standard — sets what counts towards a target and the minimum integrity criteria. SBTi, GHG Protocol.

The methodology — sets what is counted and how it is allocated. Smart Freight Centre's market-based measures methodology, among others.

Issuance and the registry — creates certificates, tracks them, retires them. Platform and programme operators.

Verification — confirms the data is right, before issuance. SCS Global Services, Verifavia, Bureau Veritas.

None of them substitutes for the others

SBTi's Standard V2.0 is clear about its own place: "the SBTi does not seek to develop or replace certification schemes" (p.47). Instead it undertakes to build a process for recognising third-party frameworks.

The 123Carbon and SCS announcement shows the same picture. Smart Freight Centre's market-based measures methodology is named as the methodology, and the announcement states an expectation that SBTi and the GHG Protocol will issue guidance.

So what to ask

Not whether there is a stamp, but who is standing in each layer.

Which standard was this certificate built towards, which methodology did it follow, who issues it and which registry holds it, and who verified it before issuance.

All four boxes have to be filled before there is an answer.

※ This article cites published material. The companies and bodies named have no contractual relationship with us.

This article expands one section of LCS EAC special report 3, Who Vouches for It. The full report works from published material by 123Carbon and DP World and from SBTi's Corporate Net-Zero Standard V2.0 as primary sources, and does not fill in values that were never published.