Many organisations enter 2026 with climate ambition firmly established. Targets exist. Programmes are in motion. Boards are engaged.
Yet LRQA’s Risk Outlook 2026 - Climate Performance and Responsible Sourcing points to a defining shift.
The central risk is no longer whether organisations intend to decarbonise, but whether they can demonstrate defensible delivery, especially across the supply chain. This shift reflects a broader evolution in connected risk management: organisations that can evidence delivery across their supply chains will gain a clear competitive advantage.
Built on survey insight from 837 organisations across multiple sectors and regions, the report captures what sustainability and procurement leaders are wrestling with in real operating conditions: constrained resources, complex supplier landscapes, and uneven data maturity. The result is a market moving beyond awareness but not yet consistently equipped to evidence progress where it matters most: Scope 3.
The decarbonisation credibility gap is widening, and it starts with validation
Target-setting is now mainstream. Among respondents responsible for climate performance within their organisation, only 9% report having no carbon reduction or net-zero target and not working towards one; a further 17% are planning to set one. But the more revealing question is what sits behind those targets. A majority, 52%, report targets that are internally defined and not externally validated. Only 22% report targets validated through recognised frameworks such as the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi). This matters because targets are increasingly referenced in procurement decisions, customer requirements, and external claims. In that environment, risk is created not simply by setting ambitious goals, but by setting goals that cannot be defended with transparent assumptions, governance and evidence.
As the report frames it, targets are increasingly judged by their foundations rather than their intent, and validation provides a common language for trust and comparability. For supply chain decarbonisation leaders, this is an early warning sign. If your upstream programme is still built on unvalidated targets, the risk is that internal momentum outpaces external confidence and that the credibility gap becomes visible at the worst possible moment (during a tender, investor review, or regulatory inquiry). Moving beyond compliance to defensible, verified targets is becoming a strategic differentiator, enabling organisations to build trust, reduce exposure and unlock opportunity.
Scope 3 is where ambition meets operational reality, and visibility is still limited
If targets set direction, Scope 3 data determines whether delivery is real. The report is blunt: measurement remains the most persistent structural challenge in climate performance, and the drop-off is steep once organisations move into the value chain. Across respondents, coverage of Scope 1 and Scope 2 is more established (measured by 30% and 34% respectively). But only 25% report measuring Scope 3 emissions across their supply chain and 11% report not measuring emissions at all.
The key insight is that Scope 3 measurement challenges are not primarily technical. The report attributes the bottleneck to supplier engagement, data availability, and methodological consistency, in other words, the “hard part” is building the operating model that can collect, improve and govern data beyond organisational boundaries. This is why many organisations feel stuck. They may have a net-zero statement and internal emissions reporting yet still lack visibility into where emissions are concentrated upstream. The risk is not simply incomplete Scope 3; it is decision-making without sufficient visibility into supply chain hotspots. The opportunity, however, is practical: progress does not require perfection on day one. The report repeatedly reinforces a prioritisation mindset, using imperfect data pragmatically, focusing effort where it is most material, and improving coverage progressively over time.
Supplier involvement is the missing delivery layer, and the data shows it
If Scope 3 is a supply chain challenge, then supplier engagement is the delivery mechanism. This is also where the report reveals one of the clearest maturity gaps. Despite growing recognition of supply chain emissions and climate exposure, only 11% of respondents report that suppliers are strongly integrated into their climate programmes. A further 37% describe some collaboration, while 45% report minimal (29%) or no supplier involvement (16%). This is the structural “missing middle” in many decarbonisation strategies: the plan exists, but the supply chain is not consistently addressed. Without supplier participation, Scope 3 emissions remain difficult to influence, and the organisation’s climate strategy risks stalling at the organisational perimeter.
The report also provides a useful indicator of how far organisations have operationalised expectations for suppliers. Only 14% apply climate-related requirements across all suppliers. 30% apply requirements to key suppliers, 33% are considering introducing them, and 18% have no such requirements at all. Read together, these findings suggest that supply chain decarbonisation is still early in its operational maturity curve. Many organisations have not yet shifted from aspiration and signalling to a structured supplier engagement model that can drive measurable change. Organisations that embed suppliers into their climate programmes are not just managing risk, they are transforming supply chain exposure into a source of strength.
Assurance is becoming a risk control, but adoption is split
As scrutiny increases, assurance becomes less of a “nice-to-have” and more of a risk control, a way to demonstrate that reasonable steps have been taken to test and validate claims. The report shows the market is divided: 49.7% of respondents say their climate data is subject to third-party verification, while 50.3% do not. For supply chain leaders, this split is telling. Scope 3 programmes built on a weak evidentiary base tend to struggle when claims move into external contexts, particularly where customers and stakeholders expect traceability of methodology, data lineage and consistency. In practice, assurance is not just about compliance; it is also an enabler of internal confidence and better decision-making, surfacing data weaknesses early and strengthening governance over time.
Why progress stalls: resources, complexity, data
One of the most important findings in the report is that barriers are now mostly practical. When asked about barriers to reducing emissions respondents cited multiple, overlapping barriers: 57% limited budget or resources, 49% supply chain complexity, and 32% data quality or availability. Only 15% cited limited leadership buy-in. This is a significant signal: most organisations no longer need convincing that supply chain decarbonisation matters. They need approaches that can scale under constraint, prioritised programmes, pragmatic data strategies, and supplier engagement models that do not overwhelm internal teams or suppliers, while clearly demonstrating how decarbonisation investment reduces long-term cost, risk and exposure.
What “good” looks like in 2026: moving from ambition to defensible delivery
The Risk Outlook 2026 findings point to a clear conclusion for organisations serious about Scope 3: the next phase is about evidence, engagement, and operational scale.
A practical pathway for supply chain decarbonisation leaders is emerging:
- Strengthen the foundations of targets: If targets are internally defined, bring forward the work that makes them defensible: clarify assumptions, governance, and validation pathways. This reduces the credibility gap and creates comparability across stakeholders.
- Build a pragmatic Scope 3 baseline (prioritise, then expand): Start where emissions and risk are most concentrated. Treat baseline-building as iterative: improve data quality and coverage over time rather than waiting for perfect inputs.
- Turn suppliers into participants, not respondents: Move from expectation-setting to structured partnership. The report shows that strong supplier integration is still rare (11%), which makes it a differentiation opportunity. Build consistent requirements for key suppliers, support data exchange, and create improvement pathways that align incentives.
- Use assurance to build confidence and defensibility: With the market split on verification, third-party assurance becomes a strategic tool: it strengthens internal systems and reduces the exposure that comes from claims without evidence.
In short: organisations that win in 2026 will not necessarily be those with the boldest claims. They will be those who can prove supply chain progress through clear targets, improved Scope 3 visibility, and supplier-enabled delivery, supported by evidence that stands up to scrutiny.
Need tailored advice?
📩 Thomas Zumbühl – thomas.zumbuhl@lrqa.com
📩 Ece Satar Pfister – Ece.Satar@lrqa.com
📩 Josh Bell – joshua.bell@lrqa.com
