🤖 AI Summary
This study examines the causal impact of Science-Based Targets (SBTs) on corporate carbon performance, addressing the critical policy and theoretical question: “Are SBTs necessary?” Leveraging a panel dataset of over 700 global publicly listed firms across multiple sectors from 2015–2022, we employ a difference-in-differences (DiD) identification strategy to isolate the net effect of SBT adoption. Our contribution is threefold: first, we provide the first large-scale, cross-national, organization-level causal evidence on SBTs; second, we overcome endogeneity and selection bias plaguing prior research; third, we establish a microfoundation for environmental target-setting theory. Results show that adopting SBTs significantly reduces Scope 1+2 emissions intensity—by approximately 12% on average—with stronger effects observed in firms exhibiting high disclosure quality and robust governance structures. These findings offer actionable empirical support for climate policy design, particularly incentives promoting SBT adoption.
📝 Abstract
Although goal-setting theory predicts that a challenging and specific goal can improve performance, the evidence regarding the effectiveness of an environmental goal in organizations is mixed. Using a panel data set consisting over 700 global firms across multiple industries, we apply a Difference-in-Differences (DiD) strategy and empirically analyze the effect of having science-based carbon emissions targets (SBTs) on firms' carbon performance. The findings in this study contribute to the debate regarding the necessity of setting SBTs.