Identifying options for additionality tests in the context of scope 2 market-based accounting

The current greenhouse gas accounting rules for reporting emissions associated with electricity consumption (known as ‘scope 2’ emissions) have been criticised for failing to differentiate between impactful and non-impactful actions, and for producing inaccurate value chain inventories. One proposed solution to these problems is to introduce an additionality test to demonstrate that there is a causal relationship between a reporting company and the emissions rate that it reports. However, few accounting proposals provide detailed information on how to test for additionality. This paper aims to contribute to discussions on this issue by identifying the range of existing additionality tests that could be used in this context and the results reveal nine relevant types of additionality test. For each type, we discuss the rationale behind it, list illustrative examples, and identify challenges related to applying the test. As two novel contributions, this paper (1) identifies cases where additionality tests have already been applied to electricity attribute procurement and reporting, and (2) examines a number of concepts and principles for selecting appropriate tests, e.g. balancing incidence of false positives and negatives, with specific reference to scope 2. Although this paper is focused on scope 2 market-based instruments, the identified tests and our discussions of them may also be useful for implementing additionality requirements for other emerging environmental attribute markets.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Carbon Management
Published
2025-03-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2025.2473910
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Capital Investment and Risk Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.83
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Identifying options for additionality tests in the context of scope 2 market-based accounting

Matthew Brander, Malte Schäfer, Anders Bjørn, Caroline Herlev Gebara
4 citations
Carbon Management
Capital Investment and Risk Analysis
8.83
article

Identifying options for additionality tests in the context of scope 2 market-based accounting

Matthew Brander, Malte Schäfer, Anders Bjørn, Caroline Herlev Gebara
article en
4 citations

Abstract

The current greenhouse gas accounting rules for reporting emissions associated with electricity consumption (known as ‘scope 2’ emissions) have been criticised for failing to differentiate between impactful and non-impactful actions, and for producing inaccurate value chain inventories. One proposed solution to these problems is to introduce an additionality test to demonstrate that there is a causal relationship between a reporting company and the emissions rate that it reports. However, few accounting proposals provide detailed information on how to test for additionality. This paper aims to contribute to discussions on this issue by identifying the range of existing additionality tests that could be used in this context and the results reveal nine relevant types of additionality test. For each type, we discuss the rationale behind it, list illustrative examples, and identify challenges related to applying the test. As two novel contributions, this paper (1) identifies cases where additionality tests have already been applied to electricity attribute procurement and reporting, and (2) examines a number of concepts and principles for selecting appropriate tests, e.g. balancing incidence of false positives and negatives, with specific reference to scope 2. Although this paper is focused on scope 2 market-based instruments, the identified tests and our discussions of them may also be useful for implementing additionality requirements for other emerging environmental attribute markets.

Carbon ManagementVol. 16(1)
University of Wuppertal (DE), Technical University of Denmark (DK), University of Edinburgh (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Capital Investment and Risk Analysis
8.83
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.