From commitments to credible action in land-intensive supply chains

By 2026, the conversation on responsible supply chains has shifted decisively. For much of the past decade, companies in retail, hospitality, food and agriculture focused on ensuring that deforestation-free and human rights commitments were in place by the end of 2025. That milestone has now passed. The question is no longer whether commitments exist, but whether organisations can demonstrate measurable progress, credible implementation and real-world outcomes. 

This transition is being shaped by three converging developments: strengthened implementation guidance from the Accountability Framework initiative (AFi), the publication of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG Protocol) Land Sector and Removals Standard (LSRS), and growing regulatory expectations under the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). Alongside these developments, updated FLAG requirements from the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) are increasing expectations for how companies account for and reduce land-based emissions. Together, these frameworks are redefining what credible action looks like in land-intensive supply chains. 

From policy commitments to implementation

AFi’s recent guidance evolution reflects a broader market shift away from high-level commitments towards evidence-based implementation. The focus is no longer solely on whether companies have “no deforestation” or human rights policies in place, but whether they can demonstrate that these commitments are embedded operationally across sourcing regions and supplier relationships. 

This means companies are increasingly expected to: 

• Cover all relevant commodities, sourcing regions and supplier tiers, including indirect suppliers where risk exposure is material; 

• Integrate environmental and human rights due diligence processes rather than treating them separately; 

• Establish time-bound milestones and escalation pathways where non-compliance is identified; 

• Improve traceability and monitoring capabilities to support credible reporting; 

• Demonstrate grievance and remediation mechanisms that are accessible and effective; and 

• Show how procurement and commercial practices support supplier transition rather than transferring cost and risk downstream. 

This is a significant operational shift for procurement and supply chain teams. Responsible sourcing can no longer sit solely within sustainability functions as a standalone policy exercise. Commercial decision-making, supplier engagement, contracting structures and sourcing strategies increasingly need to align with climate, nature and human rights objectives. 

The growing importance of land-sector accounting

For companies exposed to food, fibre and agricultural supply chains, land-use change and agricultural production emissions frequently represent the majority of Scope 3 emissions. Historically, however, accounting for land-based emissions and removals has lacked consistency, particularly in areas such as land-use change, soil carbon sequestration and removals claims. 

The publication of the GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard in January 2026 marks a major shift in this landscape. Effective from January 2027, the Standard establishes the first globally recognised framework for measuring and reporting emissions and removals from agriculture, land use and carbon removal activities. 

Importantly, the Standard introduces clearer requirements around: 

• Accounting for land-use change and land management emissions; 

• Reporting removals separately from emissions reductions; 

• Traceability and spatial boundary requirements across value chains; 

• Treatment of biogenic emissions and carbon storage; 

• Reporting of technological removals and geologic storage; and 

• The distinction between value chain decarbonisation and the use of carbon credits. 

This distinction is particularly important. The evolving direction of travel across both voluntary and regulatory frameworks is increasingly clear that carbon removals and offsets cannot substitute for direct emissions reduction within value chains. Companies are expected to prioritise operational and supply chain decarbonisation first, while transparently reporting removals separately. 

For retail and hospitality businesses with complex global sourcing footprints, the implications are significant. More granular supply chain data, stronger traceability systems and improved supplier engagement will increasingly be required to support credible GHG inventories and climate claims. Organisations relying heavily on generic secondary data or broad removals claims are likely to face increasing scrutiny from investors, regulators and civil society. 

Alignment with SBTi FLAG requirements

The evolution of the GHG Protocol LSRS is closely linked to updates in SBTi FLAG guidance. FLAG targets remain mandatory for companies in land-intensive sectors or where FLAG emissions exceed materiality thresholds. 

Recent SBTi updates reinforce alignment with the final GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard and clarify expectations around implementation timelines, land-use accounting and no-deforestation commitments. 

One important clarification is that companies setting FLAG targets are expected to account for emissions and removals separately, even where targets are presented as a combined FLAG target. This improves transparency and reduces the risk of overstating progress through removals accounting. 

SBTi has also introduced more flexibility around no-deforestation timelines compared with earlier 2025 expectations, while maintaining an absolute long-stop deadline towards 2030 for many companies. This reflects the practical implementation challenges many organisations continue to face, particularly in complex agricultural supply chains with limited traceability. 

However, the broader expectation has not weakened. Companies are still expected to demonstrate measurable progress towards eliminating deforestation and conversion from supply chains, supported by credible monitoring, supplier engagement and governance processes. 

CSDDD and the rise of mandatory due diligence

These voluntary frameworks increasingly intersect with regulatory expectations. 

Under the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), companies are required to identify, prevent, mitigate and remediate adverse human rights and environmental impacts across their operations and value chains. This includes impacts linked to deforestation, ecosystem conversion and associated human rights risks. 

CSDDD also requires companies to adopt and implement climate transition plans aligned with the Paris Agreement. For companies with significant land-based emissions, incomplete or inconsistent land-sector accounting may undermine the credibility of those plans. 

While implementation timelines and political negotiations around CSDDD continue to evolve, the overall direction is clear: regulators increasingly expect companies to evidence how sustainability commitments are operationalised through governance, procurement, due diligence and transition planning. 

This creates growing convergence between AFi, SBTi FLAG, TNFD, SBTN and emerging regulation. Collectively, these frameworks are pushing companies towards integrated management of climate, nature and human rights risks rather than treating them as separate reporting exercises. 

Beyond disclosure towards integrated transition strategies

The post-2025 landscape is therefore defined less by commitments alone and more by implementation credibility. 

Stakeholders increasingly expect evidence that: 

• Land-use emissions are declining in line with science-based pathways; 

• Deforestation and ecosystem conversion are being addressed in practice; 

• Human rights risks are actively managed and remediated; 

• Supplier transition is being supported through commercial relationships; 

• Carbon removals are transparently reported rather than overstated; and 

• Climate, nature and human rights strategies are integrated within broader business decision-making. 

For sustainability, procurement and supply chain professionals alike, the imperative is integration. Climate transition planning, responsible sourcing and nature strategy can no longer operate in parallel. 

Companies that combine rigorous land-sector accounting with milestone-driven, rights-based supply chain implementation will be best positioned to respond to evolving investor expectations, regulatory scrutiny and stakeholder demands — and, more importantly, to deliver meaningful real-world impact across global value chains. 

Curious to know more?

Get in touch to arrange a meeting with one of our experts to explore the next step in your sustainability journey.