by Kayla Carey | August 5, 2026
GHG Protocol just made a major move toward a single global carbon accounting standard, and it could open a clearer path for how companies report insetting. Here’s what happened, and why it matters.
What Happened
On July 29, GHG Protocol announced plans to combine its corporate accounting standards with ISO 14064-1 into a single, co-branded global standard. It’s the next step in the strategic partnership announced in September 2025, and it’s aimed at giving companies one harmonized framework for corporate greenhouse gas accounting.
Alongside that announcement, GHG Protocol also:
- Released the results of its global Scope 2 consultation, which highlighted that significant questions remain around renewable electricity accounting.
- Shared early concepts for a new multi-statement reporting framework under its Actions and Market Instruments (AMI) work.
Rather than relying on a single emissions total, the emerging framework could separate:
- Corporate emissions inventories (Scope 1, 2, and 3)
- Market-based interventions, such as certificates and contractual instruments
- Climate actions and outcomes, including investments that reduce emissions beyond a company’s inventory (e.g., carbon offsets)
A consolidated draft standard is expected to go out for public consultation in Q2 2027.
Why it Matters for Insetting
For companies investing in value-chain decarbonization, this is a meaningful shift. Today’s corporate accounting is built around a single emissions inventory. Scope 1, 2, and 3 measure what a company emits, not necessarily everything it’s doing to reduce emissions. That gap makes it hard to communicate market-based interventions and other value-chain investments within today’s reporting framework, even when they deliver real climate benefits.
The proposed multi-statement approach starts to close that gap by creating separate reporting statements for different types of climate action. For companies, that could mean:
- A clearer pathway for insetting: The proposed framework creates a more defined way to report value-chain interventions. Direct interventions continue to reduce Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions and are reflected in your inventory, while certificate- or contract-based insetting could be reported through a dedicated market instruments statement.
- Greater transparency across climate actions: Instead of lumping different types of climate action together, the framework separates value-chain decarbonization from broader climate investments. That means companies can communicate the role of both insetting and offsets more clearly, with each reported according to its intended purpose.
- A stronger business case for impact: Clearer accounting makes it easier to justify funding, show progress to stakeholders, and scale value-chain decarbonization programs. When climate investments are visible, attributable, and consistently reported, they’re easier to support internally and repeat over time. That’s ultimately a climate outcome as much as a business one; accounting clarity is what lets companies channel financing toward real value-chain decarbonization.
No matter where you are on your journey, ClimeCo’s experts can help you navigate evolving standards and build an insetting strategy that works for your business.
About the Author
Kayla Carey specializes in corporate sustainability advisory, focusing on decarbonization strategy, carbon markets, and value chain interventions. She supports clients in various sectors, including cement, steel, consumer packaged goods, and energy, drawing on a background in carbon project and methodology development. Her work centers on guiding organizations through environmental markets and advancing initiatives in supply chain decarbonization and insetting, sustainability disclosures and claims, greenhouse gas accounting, and climate risk.
