GHG-P fact sheet
Greenhouse Gas Protocol
Type : International standard
Date : 1998
Implementation : 2001
Author : WRI and WBCSD
Target : Organisations
Created in 1998 by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (170 companies), with the support of NGOs and governments, the GHG Protocol works with many stakeholders to build greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting and reporting standards and to promote their large-scale adoption.
The first GHG Protocol standard was published in 2001, and since then the method has been used worldwide, notably for climate reporting, for example to the CDP.
What are the objectives of the approach?
The GHG Protocol thus develops internationally recognized calculation and reporting standards to facilitate accurate GHG assessment at various scales (organisations, territories and products).
Carrying out a GHG Protocol assessment offers organisations several advantages:
Simplify and reduce the cost of carbon accounting
Demonstrate organisations' maturity to potential investors in environmental management and their ability to develop effective strategies to reduce GHG emissions.
Provide the information facilitating participation in voluntary or mandatory GHG projects
Improve harmonisation and transparency of GHG accounting and GHG reporting
What is (are) the target(s) of the approach?
Although primarily designed for companies, this standard is also applicable to NGOs, government agencies (local, regional and national), as well as universities, enabling them to showcase their transition initiatives. For example, investors may find a valuable indicator of an organisation's readiness to face future climate policies through rigorous management of GHG emissions.
The GHG Protocol, recognised and used internationally today, complements other initiatives. It offers companies and organisations the possibility to participate in GHG emissions reporting programs, whether voluntary or mandatory, as well as in GHG emissions trading systems. In addition, policy-makers and designers of GHG management programmes can integrate relevant elements of this standard into the development of their own accounting and reporting requirements, as CSRD did by drawing on the GHG Protocol.
Does the approach rely on a shared scientific basis?
The GHG Protocol focuses solely on accounting and reporting the seven greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol:
carbon dioxide (CO2)
methane (CH4)
nitrous oxide (N2O)
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs),
perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
sulphur hexafluoride (SF6)
nitrogen trifluoride (NF3).
Does the approach rely on a specific methodology?
The GHG Protocol method is very similar to other approaches and often serves as the standard model for GHG emissions reporting:
Organisational boundary (share of capital & control), operational boundary (scopes 1, 2 and 3), definition of a base year...
Direct GHG emissions come from sources owned or controlled by the company. Emissions from biomass combustion as well as GHGs not covered by the Kyoto Protocol should not be included in scope 1 but reported separately.
Scope 2 covers GHG emissions from the generation of purchased and consumed electricity and energy by the company within the organisational boundary.
The definition of scope 2 was revised to exclude emissions related to electricity purchased for resale, now included in scope 3. This prevents two or more companies from accounting for the same emissions in the same scope.
Scope 3 is an optional reporting category that addresses all other indirect emissions. Scope 3 emissions are a consequence of the company's activities but arise from sources that are neither owned nor controlled by the company. Indirect emissions from activities upstream of a company's electricity supplier (for example, exploration, drilling, flaring, transport) are accounted for in scope 3.
Calculation recommended according to IPCC guidelines
Inventory quality management & uncertainties
Calculation of emission reductions
Guidance for setting a reduction target.
Two approaches for accounting GHG emissions are possible:
the equity share approach
the control approach (can be defined either in financial terms or in operational terms)
It is important to note that these two approaches are not mutually exclusive, but it is encouraged to distinguish them in reporting. Capital expenditures are not taken into account by either approach, as it is considered that the parent company has neither significant influence nor financial control over these entities (exclusion of joint ventures and partnerships).
Companies must select and justify a base year with verifiable emissions data. Most opt for a single year, but an average over several consecutive years may be used to mitigate atypical fluctuations, making the data more representative.
There are two basic approaches to collecting emissions data from a company's facilities:
The centralised approach : individual facilities report activity/fuel consumption data at the company level, where GHG emissions are calculated.
The decentralised approach: individual facilities collect activity/fuel consumption data, calculate their GHG emissions directly using approved methods, and then report these data at the company level.
The choice of the accounting boundary depends on the characteristics of the company, the objective pursued and the needs of users. Several factors must be taken into account, such as:
organisational structures: control (operational and financial), ownership, legal arrangements, joint ventures...
operational boundaries: on-site and off-site activities, processes, services and impacts
business context: nature of activities, geographic locations, industry sector(s), objectives of the information and users of the information
All relevant emission sources must be included in reporting for it to be complete. Although the idea of a may seem useful, it is not compatible with the GHG Protocol's completeness principle. When emissions have not been estimated or are estimated at an insufficient quality level, it is essential that this be clearly documented and justified.
The GHG Protocol describes five accounting principles which establish an implicit standard for the faithful representation of a company's GHG emissions through its technical, accounting and reporting efforts. Guidance on uncertainty assessments, as well as an uncertainty calculation tool, have been developed.
Does the approach rely on tools?
Cross-sector and industry-specific tools, developed in partnership with industry groups such as the International Aluminium Institute and the WBCSD, complement the GHG Protocol to improve the accuracy of emissions data. Simplified, they are accessible to non-technical company staff.
Guidelines for each calculation tool include the following sections:
Overview : provides an overview of the tool's purpose and content, the calculation method used and a description of the process.
Selection of activity data and emission factors : provides sector-specific good practice guidance and references for default emission factors.
Calculation methods : describes different calculation methods depending on the availability of site-specific activity data and emission factors.
Quality control : offers good practice guidance.
Internal reporting and documentation : offers guidance on internal documentation to support emissions calculations.
Can other low-carbon transition methods and tools be used to achieve the objectives of this approach?
The steps of the approach are:
The boundary (which includes operational delimitation, description of the value chain, determination of relevant scope 3 categories)
Accounting (which involves calculating emissions, notably identifying GHG emission sources, collecting emission factors and activity data, applying calculation tools, and aggregating GHG emissions data)
The action plan (proposal to set targets, optional): refer to the GHG Protocol Mitigation Goal Standard
The evaluation (optional) : refer to the GHG Protocol Policy and Action Standard and to the GHG Protocol Project Quantification Standard
The steps of defining the boundaries to be accounted for, collecting and using data as well as that of the reduction Action plan are all addressed within the Bilan Carbone® methodology, which is therefore compatible with that of the GHG Protocol. It should be noted that the GHG Protocol focuses on reporting issues in order to strengthen transparency on organisations' responsibility for GHG emissions whereas the Bilan Carbone® is a strategic management method that integrates their vulnerability and dependency issues. Moreover, the GHG Protocol, like the Bilan Carbone® and ISO 14064-1, allows launching an ACT® approach to assess energy-climate strategies.
Does it allow third-party recognition? If so, in what way?
An independent or internal verification is possible. The required information is:
Organisation activity and types of emissions
General information
Details and justifications of any boundary changes during the observed period
Procedures for identifying emission sources
Information on the level of assurance in systems and data
Data used for the inventory
Description of the calculation method
Description of the information collection process
Other information
Verifiers can assess the potential impact and relevance of excluding certain emission sources or of poor overall reporting quality.
Can this approach be harmonised with other international frameworks?
The fact sheets of the Overview of carbon accounting methods and tools are the result of a synthesis work by ABC. We welcome your feedback or questions on this form.
Last updated