According to a recent LinkedIn post from Chloris Geospatial, updated guidance from the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) on Forest, Land and Agriculture (FLAG) appears to give companies more flexibility in setting no-deforestation targets. The post notes that the prior fixed 2025 deadline for eliminating deforestation has been replaced with a framework that ties compliance to each company’s target-review cycle and submission timing.
Claim 30% Off TipRanks
- Unlock hedge fund-level data and powerful investing tools for smarter, sharper decisions
- Discover top-performing stock ideas and upgrade to a portfolio of market leaders with Smart Investor Picks
The company’s LinkedIn post highlights that the hard deadline for adding a FLAG target has been removed, and companies with existing science-based targets can now wait until their five-year review to incorporate FLAG. It also suggests that firms must now reach no-deforestation within two years of submitting a FLAG target, with an absolute cutoff date of December 31, 2030, which may alter how businesses phase investments in land-use and supply-chain risk management.
As shared in the post, the revised guidance introduces a new recommendation known as FLAG-R3, which encourages companies to progressively expand no-deforestation commitments across all relevant commodities. The commentary emphasizes that for food and agriculture businesses, land-use change is often the main source of emissions, implying that pressure to manage deforestation and land conversion is likely to increase as investors and regulators scrutinize climate strategies.
The post suggests that a phased or initially narrow approach to commodity coverage may still be acceptable, but is framed as a starting point rather than an end state. For investors, this shift could signal rising demand for monitoring, data, and verification tools—areas aligned with Chloris Geospatial’s capabilities—as companies seek to comply with evolving SBTi expectations while managing transition risks, reputational exposure, and potential cost implications within their supply chains.

