Corporate Carbon Footprint: What You Need to Know in 2026

Key takeaway: While the CSRD simplification at the end of 2025 raised the mandatory reporting threshold to 1,000 employees, market pressure remains strong. In 2026, carbon footprint assessment (including Scope 3) will become essential for responding to calls for tenders from large groups, securing bank financing, and effectively managing your decarbonization trajectory.  Mastering your carbon footprint data today is no longer just a legal requirement, but a decisive competitive advantage at the heart of value chain decarbonization.

As clients becoming increasingly demanding, how can you leverage your carbon footprint to boost your competitiveness starting in 2026?

This article shows you how to structure your data for a carbon footprint assessment to meet the requirements of your clients and stakeholders. You will discover practical methods to map your emissions, ensure the accuracy of your figures, and develop a credible and actionable carbon strategy for 2026.

Carbon Footprint Assessment : What Will Really Change in 2026

Carbon Accounting: More Than Just a Number

A company’s carbon footprint is far more than a mere audit; it is a comprehensive diagnostic of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions and fossil fuel dependency across the entire value chain. Measured in tonnes of CO₂ equivalent (tCO₂e), this assessment serves as a critical strategic steering tool for your organization.

It is important to distinguish between methodologies. While the GHG Protocol is the most widely used international carbon accounting standard, some regions rely on specific frameworks (such as the Bilan Carbone® in France, a registered trademark of ADEME). Regardless of the framework, the goal remains the same: carbon accounting provides a baseline for climate action.

However, measurement is not the endgame. The real objective is to identify major emission hotspots to build a robust decarbonization roadmap and tangibly reduce your environmental impact.

BEGES: The Legal Obligation Explained in France

In many jurisdictions, carbon reporting is shifting from voluntary to mandatory. In France, this is regulated through the BEGES (Bilan d'Émissions de Gaz à Effet de Serre). Under Article L 229-25 of the Environmental Code, reporting is a strict legal requirement for:

• Companies with more than 500 employees in mainland France.

• Companies with more than 250 employees in overseas territories.

• Local authorities with over 50,000 inhabitants.

• Public institutions with more than 250 staff members.

Failure to comply can lead to significant financial penalties. These reports must be updated every four years for private companies and every three years for public entities. By law, they must cover direct and indirect energy-related emissions, defined as Scope 1 and Scope 2 in international methodologies.

To transform this into a true strategic tool, it is highly recommended to update the assessment annually and include all other indirect emissions, known as Scope 3.

CSRD and the "Omnibus I" Package: A Drastic Shift in Late 2025

On December 16, 2025, the European Parliament officially adopted the Omnibus I Directive. This update profoundly modifies the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) requirements to alleviate the administrative burden on businesses [1]:

• Higher Workforce Thresholds: The reporting obligation now only applies to companies with more than 1,000 employees (up from 250).

• Revenue Threshold: The net annual turnover criteria has been raised to €450 million.

• Exclusion of Listed SMEs: Small and medium-sized listed enterprises, as well as pure financial holdings, are now entirely excluded from the mandatory CSRD scope.

• Scope Reduction: These changes are estimated to reduce the number of companies initially targeted by the directive by approximately 90%.

For those who are impacted, a basic emission report will no longer suffice. The CSRD requires third-party verified reporting and a double materiality analysis to assess how climate change impacts the company financially and how the company impacts the environment.

Sanctions in 2026: The Real Risks in France

Do not underestimate the cost of inaction. In France, failing to publish a BEGES can now result in fines of up to €50,000, rising to €100,000 for repeat offences [2]. However, the real threat lies in reputational risks. Growing pressure from stakeholders (including B2B clients and investors) often proves far more costly than administrative fines.

Under the CSRD, sanctions for non-compliant sustainability reporting will become significantly more severe, complex, and deterrent for corporate leadership.

Why Anticipate: From Strategic Choice to Competitive Advantage

By moving outside the mandatory scope of the CSRD, many SMEs and mid-caps have regained control over their climate agenda. Conducting a carbon footprint assessment in 2026 is no longer just a constraint; it is a powerful signal to clients and financiers that your company is measuring its impact to build a resilient strategy. By staying ahead of prime contractor expectations, you secure your position as a preferred partner in a rapidly evolving value chain.

Since the late 2025 simplification exempts companies with fewer than 1,000 employees, carbon management is now the choice of a visionary leader. Here is why a carbon assessment is your best asset in 2026:

• A gateway to business partnerships: By anticipating the expectations of large corporate buyers without being legally forced to, you send a strong signal to the market. You secure your position in value chains that remain committed to their decarbonization goals.

• A tool for operational efficiency: Mapping your emissions often reveals internal inefficiencies, particularly regarding energy consumption. It provides a concrete dataset to guide cost-saving actions.

• Attracting talent and customers: Precise carbon management strengthens your brand. You immediately become more attractive to mission-driven talent, conscious consumers, and strategic business partners.

• Future-proofing your business: Ultimately, it is a matter of longevity. Anticipation enables you to manage future climate risks and ensure your business model remains viable in an inevitable low-carbon economy.

In 2026, the competitive edge belongs to those who decarbonize by strategic conviction rather than legal injunction.

Scopes 1, 2, and 3: Mapping Your Emissions from A to Z

Under international standards like the GHG Protocol, greenhouse gas emissions are categorised into three distinct scopes:

• Scope 1 : Direct emissions from sources owned or controlled by the company.
• Scope 2 : Indirect emissions from the generation of purchased energy.
• Scope 3 : All other indirect emissions occurring in the company’s value chain.

Scope 1: Direct Emissions Under Your Control

Scope 1 covers your company’s direct greenhouse gas emissions, i.e. those released from sources that your organization physically owns or directly controls.

In practice, this includes sources such as:

• Stationary Combustion: Gas or oil burned in your boilers, furnaces or other stationary equipment.

• Mobile Combustion: Fuel consumed by your company’s vehicle fleet.

This is the most straightforward category to identify, and it is where a company usually has the most direct leverage for immediate action.

Scope 2: Purchased Energy

Scope 2 covers indirect emissions resulting from your energy consumption. Specifically, it refers to the emissions generated during the production of the electricity, heat, steam, or cooling that you purchase from a third party.

Even though these emissions do not occur on your physical site, you are responsible for them through your procurement choices. This includes the power used by your offices, factories, or data centers. These emissions are relatively easy to measure and offer a quick win for reduction, for example, by switching to a renewable energy provider.

Scope 3: The Hidden Giant of Your Value Chain

Scope 3 is often the most complex to calculate, yet it is the most critical. It covers all other indirect emissions that occur in the company’s value chain, both upstream (suppliers) and downstream (customers).

For the majority of organizations, Scope 3 accounts for more than 70% of their total carbon footprint. Ignoring this massive volume means missing the core of your environmental impact.

Internationally, reporting requirements are tightening. In France, for example, calculating Scope 3 has been mandatory for the regulatory BEGES since 2023, a major shift for companies that previously only focused on Scopes 1 and 2.

Key Scope 3 Categories You Cannot Ignore

To structure the analysis, the GHG Protocol divides Scope 3 into 15 distinct categories. The most "material" (significant) categories usually include:

• Purchased goods and services: Emissions from the production of raw materials and services you buy.
• Downstream transportation and distribution: Freight and logistics required to receive materials and deliver finished products.
• Business Travel: Emissions from corporate trips via air, rail, or car.
• Employee Commuting: Daily travel of your workforce to and from the site.
• Use of sold products: Emissions generated by customers when they use your products (e.g., energy consumption of an appliance).
• End-of-life treatment of sold products: Emissions from the disposal and recycling of sold products and their packaging.
• Waste generated in operations: Emissions from the treatment of waste produced by your own activities.

Collecting this data is the greatest technical challenge of a carbon assessment. It requires close collaboration with suppliers and customers, forcing companies to deeply understand their value chain and engage in a transparent dialogue with partners.

Why Scope 3 is your greatest leverage?

While Scope 3 is difficult to measure, it holds the highest potential for innovation and impact. True transformation happens when you influence procurement policies or product design.

A concrete example: Choosing local suppliers or integrating recycled materials can drastically reduce emissions related to both "Purchased Goods" and "Transport."

Mastering your Scope 3 allows you to move beyond simple compliance. It builds a credible climate strategy that meets the rising expectations of stakeholders while future-proofing your business model.

Conducting Your Carbon Assessment in 2026: A Step-by-Step Process

Understanding Scope theory is one thing; putting it into practice is another. A carbon footprint assessment cannot be improvised; it is a cross-functional project that must mobilize every department within the company.

Step 1 : Scoping and Defining the Boundaries

Everything begins here, and this is often where errors slip in. You must define your organizational and operational boundaries with absolute rigor to know exactly what to count. This ensures that all relevant activities and flows (including all subsidiaries and production sites) are accounted for. This is also the time to set your baseline year.

Don't leave this project unattended. Appointing a competent project manager or dedicated team is non-negotiable. This is not a simple technical formality, but a real transformation project for your organization.

Involve your management team from day one. Without their budget approval and strategic support, you will lack both the resources and the legitimacy to move forward.

Step 2 : Data Collection, The Real Challenge

Let’s be clear: this is the most tedious and time-consuming phase. You will need to track down precise activity data for every emission source identified in your scope. This means retrieving gas bills, tallying liters of fuel, weighing raw materials, or tracing kilometers traveled.

Prioritize Physical Data: Always favor physical flows over monetary amounts. Knowing you spent €10,000 is vague; knowing the exact number of kWh consumed provides the indispensable precision required for a high-quality audit.

The Scope 3 Challenge: The real difficulty lies in Scope 3, which is often opaque. You will likely need to survey your suppliers, use industry-specific averages, or rely on Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) to fill the data gaps.

Step 3 : Calculation and Analysis of Your Results

Once the raw data is secured, the calculation begins. The formula is simple: each unit of activity data is multiplied by a specific Emission Factor to determine the actual impact. The final result is expressed in tonnes of CO₂ equivalent (tCO₂e), the global standard.

These coefficients are pulled from official, verified databases—primarily the ADEME Empreinte® database in France (which guarantees the reliability of your calculations).

The analysis then allows you to interpret the figures. Which scope and categories carry the most weight? In most cases, this will be Scope 3. Next, identify the most significant emission sources so you know where to focus your efforts.

Step 4 : Establishing a Concrete Reduction Plan

A diagnosis only has an impact if it is followed by concrete actions. Develop a realistic, prioritized reduction plan to effectively lower your carbon footprint. Define clear measures, assign each task to a manager, and set a specific timeline to avoid inertia.

It is essential to set ambitious but realistic targets. Aiming for a 20% reduction in Scope 1 emissions within three years, for example, gives your teams a clear direction.

Remember that this plan is a legal requirement under the regulatory BEGES framework. It will be made public along with your carbon footprint, directly impacting your company's reputation.

Step 5 & 6 : Implementation and Publication

Now comes concrete action on the ground. Closely monitor the implementation of your chosen measures, measure their real-world effectiveness, and don't hesitate to make adjustments if results are slow in coming.

Finally, formalize your efforts. In France, submitting your assessment and transition plan to the ADEME platform is the step that validates your regulatory compliance. This is the only way to avoid the financial penalties stipulated by law.

Don't keep these results to yourself. Communicate them internally and externally to showcase your commitment and motivate your employees.

Carbon Footprint Methodologies and Standards: Which one should you choose to ensure compliance?

The process is clear, but what technical basis should you use? There are several “languages” for talking about carbon. Understanding their differences and how they complement each other is essential for making the right choice.

The Bilan Carbone® Method: a Framework Compatible with France’s Regulatory GHG Assessment (BEGES)

Developed by ADEME, the Bilan Carbone® method is France’s reference methodology for greenhouse gas emissions accounting.

More comprehensive than the regulatory BEGES exercise alone, it engages organizations in a structured approach by helping them define a emissions reduction pathway and build an associated, operational action plan.

When implemented in compliance with the regulatory scope and requirements, the Bilan Carbone® method fully meets the obligations of France’s mandatory greenhouse gas emissions assessment (BEGES). It therefore provides a robust, recognized and secure framework to ensure regulatory compliance while going beyond minimum legal requirements.

The methodology relies on the Base Empreinte® database, an official and regularly updated emissions factor database, ensuring the reliability and consistency of calculations.

The GHG Protocol: the International Reference Standard

The GHG Protocol (Greenhouse Gas Protocol) is the most widely used standard worldwide. It is the common language of carbon reporting adopted by multinational companies. Mastering this framework enables organizations to communicate effectively with international partners and investors. It is authoritative across all regions.

The GHG Protocol established the fundamental distinction between Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions, creating a globally recognized framework. This structure serves as a reference for many international standards, even though some methodologies (such as the French approach) use a different classification into six categories. It represents the original matrix of carbon accounting.

Choosing the GHG Protocol is particularly relevant for companies with a strong international presence or with demanding investors and partners, including within France. It also supports compliance with regulatory and normative requirements, such as the CSRD, which explicitly recommends this framework, or submissions to the SBTi, for which the baseline must be calculated in accordance with the GHG Protocol.

How do these frameworks fit together? A summary comparison table

To quickly clarify the differences, nothing is more effective than a direct, side-by-side comparison of these technical approaches.

ClimateSeed’s Recommendations: Don’t Choose but Combine

The objective is not to select one framework at the expense of another. French and international methodologies are largely compatible and can be used together. For a French company, it is recommended to collect all the necessary data so that emissions can be calculated using both approaches. This makes it possible to ensure regulatory compliance, align with international best practices, and prepare for a potential SBTi submission.

In practice, the most effective approach for a French company in 2026 is often to use the Bilan Carbone® method for its technical robustness. It is the most reliable foundation for data collection and emissions calculation.

The key requirement is to ensure that the final reporting is structured in accordance with the principles of the GHG Protocol, in order to meet international expectations and CSRD requirements.

To learn more, we invite you to read our dedicated article:
“GHG Accounting: How to Choose the Right Methodology to Calculate Your Company’s Carbon Footprint?”

Who can carry out a corporate carbon footprint assessment? Solutions on The Market

The method has been chosen and the process is well established. But one very practical question remains: who will do the work? And how much will it cost? Below are some examples.

The internal approach: train a carbon expert

Opting to do it internally is a bold move that requires designating a specific resource. This involves dedicating one or more people from your team and training them rigorously in calculation methodologies. This employee then becomes your organization's official carbon expert.

This approach has an undeniable strategic advantage: the development of internal expertise. Technical expertise and a detailed understanding of climate issues remain within the company, which is invaluable for annual monitoring.

However, there is a risk of a lack of objectivity regarding your own emissions, the possibility of errors, and a significant underestimation of the workload, particularly during the very first exercise.

SaaS Software: Automation in Service of Carbon Accounting

We are currently witnessing a rapid expansion of SaaS software and online platforms dedicated to carbon accounting. These tools make it possible to centralize company and value chain data and to automate part of the data collection and emissions calculation process, fundamentally transforming the market.

However, not all platforms are created equal. There are two main types:

• Monetary-based platforms, which rely on financial data (such as bank transactions or accounting records) to estimate carbon emissions. These are the least expensive solutions, but their accuracy is very limited, often involving uncertainty levels of up to 80%.
  
  
• Activity- or physical data-based platforms, which rely on “real” data such as energy consumption in kWh, tonnes of purchased goods, or kilometres traveled. While more costly, these solutions are significantly more reliable and accurate which is an essential requirement for building a credible transition plan. ClimateSeed’s GEMS platform prioritizes this approach, while remaining flexible enough to incorporate monetary data when necessary.

Despite their advantages, these platforms still face a key technical limitation: companies are often left to operate them largely on their own. This can lead to time loss, confusion, and ultimately data of questionable reliability. Users are typically supported by a Customer Success Manager rather than a true carbon expert, which significantly limits the quality of guidance. Moreover, for detailed data collection and analysis—particularly for Scope 3 emissions—expert human support is often required to verify data quality, refine assumptions, and properly interpret results.

This is why, at ClimateSeed, we combine the expertise of consultants from leading consulting firms with the power of our GEMS platform. Click here to learn more.

This hybrid approach enables us to support our clients not only in the accurate calculation of their carbon footprint, but also in the definition and implementation of a strategic, robust, and business-relevant transition plan.

Consulting Firms: Turnkey Expertise

Engaging a specialized consulting firm or expert decarbonization consultants remains the safest option for business leaders. This traditional approach guarantees comprehensive support, from the initial scoping to the precise definition of a reduction action plan.

However, it is important to distinguish between large consulting firms (typically mobilized by major corporations or highly complex organizations). Large firms handle ambitious transition trajectories involving extensive regulatory requirements, complex organizational setups, and significant budgets.

For SMEs and mid-sized companies, specialized consultancies offering more operational support, scaled to the company’s specific needs, are often more relevant. The benefits are clear: access to high-level external expertise, an independent perspective on internal processes, and assurance of methodological compliance, without the heavy structures designed for large corporations.

Today, these firms increasingly rely on dedicated platforms that combine digital tools with expert guidance. This hybrid model allows companies to structure, automate, and manage their carbon strategy while ensuring accurate interpretation of data. This is precisely the approach adopted by ClimateSeed, providing SMEs and mid-sized companies with a solution that is reliable, efficient, and tailored to their level of maturity.

The benefits are tangible: immediate access to specialized external expertise, a fresh perspective on internal processes, and full assurance of methodological compliance with standards.

By combining this expertise with a dedicated platform, consulting firms enable companies to structure, automate, and oversee their carbon strategy while receiving expert guidance. This hybrid model delivers the best of both worlds: reliability, time savings, and gradual autonomy, while ensuring precise and secure data interpretation. ClimateSeed has adopted this model to provide its clients with reliability, efficiency, and progressive autonomy.

In-House, Consultant, or SaaS: How to Choose?

Let’s be clear: there is no universal, one-size-fits-all solution. The choice depends on your company’s size and complexity, your budget, and your level of maturity on climate-related topics.

• In-house solution: may be suitable for organizations that already have internal expertise, but generally requires support and a platform to ensure the reliability of the carbon footprint.

• SaaS platform alone: a good compromise for SMEs and mid-sized companies seeking a practical tool to structure and manage their carbon strategy. However, without expert guidance, data reliability and interpretation can quickly become a challenge (especially for Scope 3 emissions) leading to wasted time and potential inaccuracies which is not appropriate for creating effective transition plans.

• Large consulting firms: this type of support is primarily aimed at large corporations or international groups, highly complex organizations, and ambitious transformation projects. Services are usually more expensive due to high volumes of consulting days and elevated daily rates. This model is rarely suitable for SMEs or mid-sized companies.
  
  
• Consultancy + platform: hybrid models are increasingly preferred because they closely match the real needs of companies, whether SMEs, mid-sized companies, or large groups. Combining consulting expertise with a digital platform allows organizations to manage the complexity of carbon accounting, secure calculations, and interpret results, while automating data collection and processing. This approach is particularly effective for companies looking to save time and ensure the reliability of their carbon strategy.

This is precisely the approach advocated by ClimateSeed. Our offer combines:

• A team of carbon experts from leading consulting firms, capable of supporting every step of emissions measurement and reduction.

• A SaaS platform (GEMS) that simplifies data collection, centralizes information, and ensures accurate calculations. The platform is certified as Bilan Carbone® compliant by the ABC.

If you want to know more, please contact our team. 

The Real Cost of a Carbon Footprint Assessment 

Let’s talk about budget to avoid surprises.

The cost of a carbon footprint assessment varies widely and depends primarily on the size of the company, the complexity of its operations (especially the scope of its value chain), and the type of service chosen (monetary-based SaaS, physical-data SaaS, consultancy support, hybrid model, etc.). It is important to note that a reliable and actionable carbon footprint cannot be produced at low cost.

Typical ranges observed by ClimateSeed:

• SMEs: €13,000 to €15,000 for a first comprehensive carbon footprint (including indirect emissions), generally corresponding to about 10 consulting days.

• Mid-sized / large companies: €20,000 to €50,000, depending on scope and depth of analysis.

• Large international groups: costs can exceed €100,000 when multiple subsidiaries, countries, and decarbonization scenarios are involved.

Expert support or software: which is best for SMEs and mid-sized companies?

• Monetary-based SaaS tools (€2,000–€4,000): provide an initial estimate but with high uncertainty and limited operational value. Most companies quickly move on to more precise solutions.

• Physical-data SaaS tools: recommended by ADEME, these allow precise measurement and the construction of concrete reduction levers. ClimateSeed’s GEMS platform is a typical example of this approach.

• Freelancers or independent consultants: can provide targeted support or limited diagnostics. This option is flexible and relatively inexpensive, but it does not always deliver a complete, structured view, nor does it guarantee regulatory compliance for complex projects.

• Large consulting firms: mainly aimed at large or international organizations, complex structures, and companies pursuing ambitious climate transformation programs with significant budgets. Services involve many consulting days at high daily rates, making this approach suitable for large groups but less relevant for most SMEs and mid-sized companies.

• Consultancy + platform (hybrid model): today, this is the reference model for SMEs and mid-sized companies. It combines the expertise of a specialized consultant with a dedicated platform, offering reliability, regulatory compliance, and progressive autonomy. This model ensures accurate calculations, interprets data, and allows operational management of the carbon strategy. For an SME, entry-level budgets typically start around €13,000 to €15,000, offering an optimal balance between cost and efficiency. This is the type of solution provided by ClimateSeed. Contact us to learn more.

Fortunately, support programs can help reduce the financial burden. For example in France, the “Diag Décarbon’Action” program, co-financed by Bpifrance and ADEME, is specifically designed for companies with fewer than 500 employees. At ClimateSeed, we can assist you within the framework of Diag Décarbon’Action, and our experts are certified by Bpifrance.

This valuable support allows companies to benefit from comprehensive guidance at a significantly reduced cost. Be sure to explore Diag Décarbon'Action before signing any service agreement. At ClimateSeed, our consultants are certified to provide Diag Décarbon'Action support.

After the carbon footprint: turning insights into a winning strategy.

The report is on the table, the numbers are known. Many companies stop here. This is only the first step; it remains essential to go further and transform these data into concrete actions.

And After? Creation of An Effective Transition Plan

The action plan required under French regulations as part of the BEGES reporting obliges companies to measure their greenhouse gas emissions and define concrete actions to reduce them. This plan is mandatory and helps structure operational initiatives. While it can be useful and transformative depending on how it is implemented, it does not necessarily guarantee full alignment with the company’s overall strategy.

A true transition plan, on the other hand, goes much further. It ensures that the low-carbon strategy is fully aligned with the company’s overall business strategy, creating strong coherence between economic vision and climate urgency.

This is not just about changing light bulbs or adjusting heating. It requires challenging the current business model, product offerings, and the structure of the supply chain.

The plan must be driven at the highest level, directly by the executive committee, rather than being confined to the CSR department, which is often isolated.

The GHG Protocol primarily serves as a framework for measuring emissions. It does not prescribe the implementation of a transition plan, but it provides the data companies need to define their actions and reduction targets.

SBTi and ACT: Aligning Your Goals with Science

Let’s look at the Science Based Targets (SBTi). This is a voluntary and rigorous framework that allows companies to set emission reduction targets fully aligned with the Paris Agreement trajectories (+1.5°C).

Having targets validated by the SBTi provides immediate scientific credibility. It is recognized internationally by investors and partners as a mark of seriousness and reliability. For more information, please consult our dedicated guide.

Finally, there is the ACT methodology (Assessing low-Carbon Transition) developed by ADEME. Several ACT approaches exist: some are sector-specific and evaluate the robustness of action plans, while the Step-by-Step ACT process focuses on defining and assessing the maturity of a company’s climate strategy.

Keys to an Effective Action Plan

A good action plan is more than a wish list. It must be concrete and immediately operational.

1. Prioritize actions: Start with the most actionable areas for your company (energy, business travel, etc.), even if the potential impact is moderate. This helps generate momentum and engage your teams before moving on to more complex initiatives.

2. Define KPIs: Associate each action with clear performance indicators (e.g., kWh of electricity, tons of raw materials used, or euros spent).

3. Allocate a budget: Decarbonization has a cost, which must be integrated into investment budgets.

4. Assign owners: Each action should have a clearly identified owner.

5. Focus on internal communication: Engage employees, provide training, and raise awareness on a daily basis. The transition is everyone’s responsibility, and team buy-in is essential for success.

The True Benefit of Carbon Accounting: Managing Financial Risk and Attracting Investors

We have discussed compliance and action plans. But what if the carbon footprint assessment is actually becoming one of your most scrutinized financial documents?

Carbon: A New Financial Risk

Carbon is no longer just a topic for communication or CSR reporting; it represents a concrete financial risk. A carbon assessment allows a company to identify exposure to threats that can directly affect cash flow, performance, and long-term valuation. Investors and banks now integrate this data into their analyses to evaluate the strength and resilience of businesses when facing climate challenges.

These risks fall into two main categories:

• Physical risks: such as floods, droughts, or heat waves, which can disrupt or interrupt operations.
  
  
• Transition risks: linked to regulatory changes, market expectations, etc., which can have a lasting impact on a company's cash flow and strategy. 

While a carbon assessment is an invaluable tool for quantifying a company's exposure to transition risks, it is distinct from physical risk analysis, which relies on climate scenarios rather than the company’s own emissions.

The transition risk explained

This risk stems directly from the accelerated shift to a low-carbon economy. It can take several forms: sudden regulatory tightening, technological disruption, loss of market share, or serious damage to a company's reputation.

Let's take a concrete example that could be particularly damaging: a significant increase in the price per ton of carbon. If your business model remains highly emissions-intensive, this surcharge could render your business model unviable overnight.

Another scenario: your customers turn away from your products en masse because they consider them too polluting. This is a direct market risk that immediately impacts your revenues.

How does carbon footprint reporting reassure financial institutions?

Banks are now required to assess how their loan portfolios align with global climate goals. Sooner or later, your account manager will ask you the inevitable question about your emissions.

Having a robust carbon footprint report and a credible transition plan is becoming a prerequisite for accessing financing or securing better interest rates.

Conversely, not having accurate carbon data can act as a powerful red flag for a lender.

Attracting investors through transparency

The same reasoning applies with equal rigor to investors, particularly investment funds. ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) criteria have become central to their capital allocation decisions.

The “E” in ESG invariably starts with a reliable measurement of a company's carbon footprint. A well-executed assessment is your gateway to this capital.

A company that is transparent about its impact and reduction strategy is perceived as better managed and less risky by financial analysts.

The Carbon Footprint Assessment: a Tool for Strategic Dialogue

It's time to reposition this exercise: it's no longer a technical report for specialists. It has become a powerful tool for dialogue that can engage all your stakeholders toward the right direction.

It can be used to hold constructive discussions with your suppliers to reduce Scope 3 emissions, to promote your efforts to customers, and to rally your employees around a common project.

Above all, it demonstrates to your financial partners that you have integrated climate change into your long-term vision.

Pitfalls to Avoid and Key Success Factors

The path may seem clear and the benefits obvious. Yet, many carbon footprint assessments end up forgotten at the bottom of a digital drawer. Why such a waste? Because operational reality is far harsher than theory. Between the requirements of the GHG Protocol and day-to-day practice, there is often a significant gap. If you lack rigor now, the risk goes far beyond a simple calculation error: your credibility is at stake. Here are the classic mistakes to avoid and the key ingredients that make the difference.

Pitfall n°1: Ignoring CSRD / ESRS standards and skipping the carbon footprint

This is the most dangerous pitfall in 2026 for SMEs and mid-sized companies. Even if changes in thresholds make it seem like a carbon footprint is no longer mandatory, companies must choose a reliable methodology. Complying with CSRD/ESRS requirements generally means using the GHG Protocol, thereby ensuring a precise footprint aligned with European standards.

The risk: producing carbon reporting that meets neither your stakeholders’ expectations nor those of your major clients, who remain subject to CSRD requirements. A carbon footprint assessment that does not “speak the language” of the financial ecosystem will be considered unusable, forcing you to redo the entire assessment to secure financing or respond to tenders.

The advice: even without a direct regulatory obligation, use the CSRD/ESRS framework as your compass. It guarantees robust, comparable carbon data that is immediately recognized by all stakeholders.

Pitfall n°2: Underestimating Data Collection

This is the most common mistake: assuming that collecting invoices and statements will be a simple administrative formality. In reality, it represents up to 80% of the actual work (especially for Scope 3), which covers your entire external value chain.

The risk: ending up with incomplete or poor-quality data. This ultimately makes the entire carbon footprint unreliable and completely unusable for designing a serious climate strategy.

The advice: plan ahead. Map data sources and identify the key contacts well before launching the project.

Pitfall n°3: Isolating the Project in The CSR Department

A carbon footprint assessment is not just an isolated CSR project; it is a company-wide initiative. It directly involves purchasing, logistics, production, finance, and even HR. All departments must feel responsible for the process.

If the project is led solely by the CSR team, it will lack political weight. The team will encounter barriers in data collection and in implementing the action plan.

The advice: create a cross-functional steering committee with decision-makers from each key department.

Pitfall n°4: Pursuing Perfection Instead of Progress

The quest for exact physical data down to the last gram can paralyze action. Trying to measure everything perfectly in the first year is an illusion. You will spend months chasing insignificant details instead of acting on the major emission sources.

The risk: team burnout and stagnation. It is better to have extrapolated or statistical data today than “perfect” data three years from now. The goal is to trigger a dynamic of emissions reduction.

The advice: accept initial imperfection. Use monetary or statistical ratios where real data is missing, and improve data quality in the following years.

Today, conducting a carbon footprint goes beyond simple regulatory compliance, it has become a strategic imperative. In 2026, the rigorous integration of climate issues, catalyzed by CSRD, will determine not only the financial resilience of organizations but also their long-term survival in a rapidly evolving economy.

How ClimateSeed Can Support Your Carbon Footprint Assessment and Transition Plan

ClimateSeed helps organizations conduct comprehensive carbon footprint assessments (Scopes 1, 2, and 3) and design credible, actionable transition plans. Our support combines the human expertise of our consultants with the power of our GEMS platform, providing a complete and seamless approach. For more information, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sources: 

• [1] CSRD - European Council
• [2] French Government CSR Portal