How long does the SBTi approval process take? A realistic timeline

The full SBTi approval process, from preparation through to validated targets typically takes 7-15 months for companies, even when they have specialist support. It involves several phases: including preparation, submission, target development, and the SBTi validation itself. Issues like incomplete scope 3 data often delay the process, not just the SBTi review queue itself.

Many companies can underestimate how long the SBTi approval process takes. While SBTi states that it will make a decision on your target ‘within 30 business days for near-term targets…and 60 business days for net-zero targets,’ this only tells one part of the story. There are multiple phases that businesses must take on, from preparation all the way through to the final validation decision. The whole process can take 7-15 months, even when businesses are well prepared. 

Any bottlenecks are not only down to the SBTi validation process. They also depend on what happens before submission: the data work, the baseline calculations, the target-setting and whether you’ve done it to a standard that survives scrutiny. This guide walks through the SBTi approval process phase by phase: what happens at each stage, how long it can take, and what causes timelines to stretch beyond expected deadlines.

Phase-by-phase: the SBTi approval process timeline

Phase 1: Registration and commitment

The first step is to register in the SBTi Services Validation Portal. During this process, you will confirm your organization type (e.g., corporate vs. SME) which will help you clarify which standards to follow in your target-setting process. 

Once this is completed you can choose to make a public commitment to submit a science-based target within 24 months. The 24-month countdown starts from commitment, not from preparation. If you are worried about running against the clock during your target development process you can work with an adviser to finalize your base year inventory and define your targets first. This means that you can submit straight away, rather than committing and then scrambling.

The advantage of committing is that your organization will be listed as “Committed” on the SBTi Target Dashboard. This is particularly helpful in showcasing that your business is committed to this process, especially if you’re facing pressure from internal or external stakeholders to set SBTs.

Phase 2: Preparation (Months 1-6)

This is where the timeline for the SBTi approval process is determined, and where most delays stem from. There are three core areas businesses need to focus on in this preparation phase. 

Base year selection and data quality. You need a stable, representative base year, one that isn’t distorted by an acquisition, a site closure, or an unusual trading period. ‘The stakes are higher than they appear: The Base Year establishes the starting point against which all future emissions performance is measured. This is why it is important for companies to have high quality data that is repeatable and can remain consistent over time. I’ve seen a business trigger a mandatory rebaseline not through any business change, but because improving their own calculation methodology shifted their scope 3 significantly. While rebaselining is a common occurrence in carbon accounting, it can be difficult for companies to go back to their base years and capture the same level of high quality data backwards without needing to make complex assumptions. Additionally, if your targets were to no-longer meet the SBTi criteria following a rebaseline, then a company would need to re-submit their target to SBTi for validation.

Scope 3 data collection. SBTi requires scope 3 targets if scope 3 represents more than 40% of your total emissions, which is the case for most mid-to-large businesses. Near-term targets must cover at least 67% of those scope 3 emissions; long-term targets must cover 90%. That coverage requirement means prioritizing your largest emission categories and having data to back them up. To give you an idea of what is acceptable here, SBTi is not expecting a company to have 100% activity data. One of our food retail customers set a staged target of 50% activity data for their largest scope 3 category as a starting point. That’s the kind of realistic approach businesses should focus on. Additionally, following the GHG Protocol Standard, Scope 3 must be complete with emissions measured for all relevant scopes and categories in order to meet the SBTi criteria.

One note on spend-based data: it’s accepted with a credible improvement plan, but it has a fundamental limitation. As one of our customers put it when reviewing their scope 3 position: “If we spend 100%, how are we going to reach net zero without decreasing our spend?” So, while spend-based data is a good starting point, transitioning toward supplier-specific and activity-based data is the only path to defensible long-term reductions.

Phase 3: Target development (Months 7-8)

Target setting. Near-term and net-zero targets are typically submitted together. Near-term targets are defined as 5 to 10 years, for absolute targets, whereas a supplier engagement target has a maximum length of 5 years. Both targets must meet SBTi’s ambition thresholds to pass review.

To cater for diverse business models and emissions hotspots, corporates have a wide range of target types to choose from when setting cross-sector targets, including: absolute reduction, intensity, renewable electricity, and engagement targets. Companies also have significant flexibility in how they structure their target boundaries; you can set a single, overarching target for all scopes (1, 2, and 3), develop multiple category-specific targets, or create a combination of these approaches. For instance, you could combine a scope 1 and 2 absolute target with a scope 3 intensity target. 

However, this high degree of flexibility can often become a source of confusion for customers as they navigate the validation journey. While the ability to customize target structures allows for better alignment with unique business operations, it also creates a complex decision-making process regarding base year consistency, scope coverage thresholds, and method validity. For a team unfamiliar with the technical nuances, it can be daunting to decide on a combination of absolute and intensity targets that will best satisfy mandatory coverage requirements, such as the 95% threshold for scopes 1 and 2 or the 67% requirement for near-term scope 3 emissions. This complexity underscores why it is vital for companies to clearly map their emissions inventory against the SBTi requirements before finalizing their target wording. 

It’s worth noting that companies in industries for which SBTi has developed sector-specific targets, such as Buildings, Forest Land and Agriculture or Steel, can have additional target-setting requirements for specific parts of their inventory and business activities. This can add further complexity and require more decision making.

When going through this target-development process companies need to get internal buy-in, usually from the C-suite, to ensure that everyone is aligned on what types of targets are being set and when they need to be achieved by. After all, targets are set to be met and reduction requires companies to commit to using internal resources to meet their targets.

Phase 4: Submission (Month 9)

Once data is in order and targets are set, the SBTi submission timeline itself is one month. The critical work at this stage is documentation. The package you submit needs to cover your emissions inventory, target ambition levels, scope and category coverage, and any specialist categories (such as FLAG targets for companies with significant agriculture, forestry and other land use emissions). Incomplete documentation is one of the most common triggers for revision requests.

Phase 5: SBTi Validation Process Review (Months 10-13)

Once submitted, the SBTi team will provide you with an estimation of when the review and validation process will begin. Based on the targets we’ve submitted with multiple companies during 2026, it usually takes 3-4 months for this validation period to start. SBTi reviews your data and comes back with any questions or clarifications they need. This phase requires someone on your team to own the SBTi correspondence and have the underlying data readily accessible, because once reviewers ask questions, you typically need to respond within two working days. Slow responses can quickly mount up and extend review cycles.

Review timelines vary. SBTi’s queue can build up, and backlogs do occur so build a buffer into your planning. What shortens this phase most reliably is submission quality: a complete, well-documented package that pre-empts the questions reviewers will ask. Normative’s Climate Strategy Advisors are GHG Protocol-certified and have guided companies through this process many times. These experts are the reason Normative has a 100% success rate for SBTi submissions on behalf of our customers – they will be ready to support and answer any queries from SBTi relating to inventory and targets.

Phase 6: Approval (Months 14-15)

Once approved, your targets are published on the SBTi website. Annual disclosure is required afterwards, publishing your progress each year, though this doesn’t mean you need to resubmit to SBTi annually. 

The next formal checkpoint is a mandatory five-year review, timed from your submission year, so be ready for this. The process certainly doesn’t end once you’ve had your targets validated.

What Causes SBTi Delays

If your timeline is stretching, it’s almost certainly one of these four things.

1. Incomplete inventory. If companies do not have a complete base year inventory with emissions measured for all relevant scopes and categories, they will need to collect this data or make reasonable assumptions, following the GHG Protocol Standard, to fill these gaps. If they do not do so they will not meet the SBTi criteria. For companies with complex value chains or a multitude of business activities (i..e those that work in multiple industries), this can prove difficult especially in downstream categories where there is always a high level of uncertainty.
2. Gaps in scope 3 data. Companies that reach submission without 67% scope 3 coverage, or with data quality they can’t defend, face revision requests. SBTi isn’t looking for perfection, but reviewers will expect an acknowledgment of data quality and a clear, credible improvement plan documented from the start.
3. Methodology inconsistencies. Switching carbon accounting providers mid-process, using different emission factors across years, or working with data that doesn’t meet GHG Protocol standards creates baseline instability. Critically, this isn’t only triggered by M&A or business change. A methodology improvement that increases the accuracy of your own calculations can push your reported emissions past the 5% threshold too, forcing a rebaseline. One of our customers experienced exactly this when updating their scope 1 and 2 calculation methodology. Starting right avoids the problem; retrofitting later doesn’t.
4. Missing documentation. Gaps in documentation quickly compound and can delay the validation process. 
5. Unrealistic target ambition. Targets that don’t meet SBTi’s ambition thresholds are returned for revision. Businesses also need to be aware that if they submit before SBTi’s next major standards update takes effect (1st January 2028) their targets will be assessed against current requirements. Target submissions after this date must align with the new SBTi standard.  
6. Loss of internal sponsorship. When executive support for an SBTi project shifts mid-process, momentum stalls. SBTi is a long-term commitment that needs sustained board-level ownership, not just a sustainability team initiative. However, it can be difficult to align internally on the target types to set. It typically takes C-level buy-in to agree on the level of commitment the company is willing to make. This process can take time due to the requirements, but also flexibility, of the SBT-setting standards. For companies in an industry requiring sector-specific science-based targets this can be even more difficult as there may be a multitude of targets that need to be set on their inventory to meet SBTi requirements.

How to Accelerate Your SBTi Timeline

Three things make the biggest difference.

• Start with audit-ready carbon data. A complete base year, covering all relevant scopes & categories to a high degree of quality, is a critical foundation for success with SBTi. That’s whyNormative’s carbon accounting platform produces data that’s defensible before it reaches SBTi, not after.
• Use GHG Protocol-compliant methodology from the beginning. Don’t build a baseline in a spreadsheet or with spend-only data and plan to translate it later. It’s harder to correct a foundation than to build a solid one.
• Work with advisers who know the process. Experienced advisers pre-empt reviewer questions, know what documentation needs to say, and can manage the process on your behalf. It’s why Normative’s customers have a 100% SBTi approval rate.