Methodology Updates Q2 2026

33.1 Scope 2 Market- and Location-based Targets

Change: Current Methodology Change

Affects: Policies; Energy Consumption & GHGs; S, M, L sizes (26-49,999 employees); L size (50,000+ employees)

Objective: To align Scope 2 reporting with GHG Protocol standards

Applies to:  Sustainability Rating; Carbon Rating

Release date: Jul 10, 2026   

Summary: 

EcoVadis is enhancing the granularity of its greenhouse gas (GHG) target collection by transitioning from a single, undifferentiated Scope 2 target option to requesting users to select the methodology used for calculating its Scope 2 reduction targets: Location-based and Market-based. After five years of Carbon Ratings and more than 100,000 Carbon Scorecards issued, the overall maturity of rated companies supports this increased level of detail.

This release follows and is directly based on alignment with the previous Scope 2 reporting methodology update (released on May 7, 2026), ensuring consistency across EcoVadis' data collection. This update ensures the questionnaire remains aligned with international carbon accounting standards while providing clearer insights into corporate energy procurement strategies.

Why was this change made?
This methodology update was implemented to achieve two primary goals:

• Standardized Interoperability: Adopting a dual target-setting framework aligned with the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard (and related regulatory and institutional standards) allows rated companies to maintain a consistent and internationally recognized set of climate targets across all regulatory and institutional platforms.

• Actionable Insights: Differentiating between location-based targets (reflecting the physical grid mix) and market-based targets (reflecting contractual energy procurement choices) allows for a more accurate evaluation of a company's active decarbonization efforts, such as direct investments in renewable energy procurement. 

What has changed?

The existing option, “We have an absolute scope 2 reduction target” remains available within the questionnaire. The current update will now require questionnaire respondents to select the specific methodology used to formulate the scope 2 targets, i.e., Market-based or Location-based. 

There will be no change to the scoring or to the generation of Strengths and Improvement Areas on the scorecard as a result of this update. 

33.2 Phase-out of the Select Check Up and Select Score Drop Consultation 

Change: Change in process flow for assessments of Select subscriptions

Affects: All themes; All sizes; Select subscriptions

Objective: To reinforce integrity of ratings across all subscription levels, Select Check Up and Score Drop consultations for Select are discontinued

Applies to:  Sustainability Rating

Release date: Jul 15, 2026   

Summary: 

Effective July 15, 2026, EcoVadis will discontinue the Select Check Up process and the Select Score Drop consultation. The Score Drop consultation for all (Select or not Select) L-size companies with >50,000 employees will remain active.

Why was this change made?
With the aim of reinforcing the integrity of ratings, EcoVadis has decided to discontinue:

• the Select Check-Up (including reaching out in case of corrupted documents and in case of certificates declared but certificate evidence not attached to question) 

• the Score Drop outreach for Select companies with less than 50,000 employees. However, the Score Drop outreach for companies with more than 50,000 employees will be maintained.

As part of an ongoing commitment to methodology integrity, global best practices, and providing a fair representation of each company's management system, EcoVadis is standardizing its assessment workflow through the implementation of a new feature that will be launched in July 2026: 

• Factual error check: Scorecard results will be visible exclusively to the rated company for two business days prior to network publication. During this period, companies can review their assessment and report any factual errors.

This update aligns EcoVadis procedures with evolving global best practices for independent sustainability evaluations. By standardizing this workflow and introducing the two day period, we are ensuring a more consistent and transparent experience across the entire network. With this update, Select specific processes are no longer needed and their discontinuation allows a reinforced integrity throughout all subscription levels.

What has changed?

Select rated companies are no longer consulted during the analysis phase if:

• Documents are not provided in the right format

• Certificates are declared without providing supporting evidence 

• Score drops significantly in current assessment compared to previous assessment for companies with less than 50,000 employees 

33.3 Additional scorecard granularity through new Improvement Areas 

Change: Current Methodology Change

Affects: Environment; S, M, L sizes (26-49,999 employees); L size (50,000+ employees)

Objective: To Increase Transparency and Clarity of the scorecard

Applies to:  Sustainability Rating

Release date: Jul 15, 2026   

Summary: 

This is the third batch of a methodology update that aims to provide enhanced visibility into Improvement Areas and scoring requirements by providing additional alerts on the scorecard.

Why was this change made?
This update was implemented to enhance the transparency and clarity of the scorecard. Previously, the methodology provided Strength and Improvement Areas that were too broad. By adding granularity (more detailed Improvement Areas), the scorecard now defines more precisely what is being measured and how specific scoring levels are achieved. This allows rated companies to better understand the requirements needed to establish effective corrective actions.

What has changed?

Granular Feedback on Sector Best Practices: the new batch of new Improvement areas delivered on newly published scorecards.

As a reminder, the scorecard is moving from general improvement areas to highly specific, diagnostic feedback that points directly to missing best practices.

The scorecard now shows new, specific Improvement Areas that directly map to established sector best practices. These best practices are already included in the questionnaire. If a practice is not identified as being in place during the analysis process, it will be explicitly flagged as an Improvement Area on the scorecard. This gives rated companies additional transparency on the specific actions they can implement to move to the next scoring level. The specific Improvement Areas are examples of actions available in the questionnaire, and not a list of mandatory requirements.

This change applies to the Environment theme, and specifically to these criteria: Water, Biodiversity and  Air pollution.

33.4 Country Risk Update August 2026

Change: Current Methodology Change

Affects: Country risk profile; All sizes 

Objective: To reflect the risk adjustments from conflict data and carbon data 

Applies to:  Sustainability Rating

Release date: Jul 29, 2026   

Summary: 

EcoVadis customizes sustainability assessments based on each organization's specific size, industry, and location. To maintain the precision of these evaluations, countries are classified into Low, Medium, and High Risk categories based on an analysis of 23 international indexes covering Environment, Health & Safety, Human Rights, and Governance. EcoVadis reviews these country risk profiles biannually to ensure they reflect current global conditions. This update incorporates the latest data regarding conflict-affected regions and carbon emissions, ensuring that all rated companies are evaluated using the most accurate and consistent regional risk data.

Why was this change made?
This update is part of the regular commitment to data integrity and methodological accuracy. The changes are derived from two primary data adjustments:

1. Conflict Risk Adjustments: Methodology updates now reflect the most recent World Bank data regarding conflict-affected countries. This adjustment specifically impacts theme-level risk assessments for Iran, Libya, and Papua New Guinea.

> These adjustments are limited to specific theme-level data and do not change the overall country risk level; therefore, they have no impact on the sustainability score for rated companies in these locations.

2. Carbon Risk Adjustments: As part of standard quality assurance protocols, data processing processes have been strengthened. This resulted in adjustments to environmental risk values to ensure greater consistency across all benchmarked sources for a subset of countries.

> These updates modify specific country risk levels, which may result in a change to the overall sustainability score for affected companies. Please review the table in the following section for details.

What has changed?

The following table outlines the revisions to country risk levels between the January 2026 and August 2026 assessments. Please refer to this Help Center article to know how the country's risk level impacts the score.