The Greenhouse Gas Protocol has released its Land Sector and Removals Standard (LSRS), a long-awaited update that defines how companies account for land-based emissions, reductions and removals. Here’s what sustainability leaders across agriculture, mining, apparel, energy and infrastructure need to know.
Key facts about the LSRS
- Mandatory from 1 January 2027 for companies that report emissions in line with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol.
- Implementation guidance will be released in mid-2026 to help businesses prepare.
- The standard applies to companies with land-intensive operations or supply chains, including agriculture, food and drinks, mining, energy, apparel and construction.
- The current version of the LSRS doesn't cover forestry. Companies with material forestry activities should monitor for updates.
With the agricultural sector particularly sensitive to climate risks, and the costs of delayed action on deforestation mounting, the standard sets a long-awaited framework for land-sector accountability and resilience. Its introduction will reshape markets, raising expectations for land-based climate action and altering how companies source, verify, and value agricultural and land-derived commodities.
What are the data requirements, and where to start?
The LSRS requires several data points to calculate both emissions and removals, alongside which key assumptions and methodology must be recorded.
At the core of the LSRS is the concept of traceability (identifying the geographical origins of land-based products), which determines which land areas to consider in the inventory and the specific reporting rights. The more precise the traceability, the more detailed the reporting options and the greater the evidence required. Companies must report on emissions specific to the traceability and lands identified; removals are optional but subject to stricter rules.
The LSRS can appear data‑heavy. But most of the more demanding requirements only apply if a company chooses to report on emission reductions or claim land‑based removals. For all other reporting, a phased approach beginning with broader, lower‑resolution data can suffice while companies build their capabilities and processes to support more specific claims over time. To do so, companies should map and prioritise their supply chains based on materiality, traceability, mitigation potential, leverage on suppliers, and co-benefits beyond carbon.
This prioritisation allows for progress at a manageable pace, beginning with what is feasible today, while laying the groundwork for deeper, more detailed reporting as their strategy and data systems mature.
Looking for detailed explanations on data requirements? Visit the Greenhouse Gas Protocol's dedicated page or watch our webinar.
What changes will occur in the market?
We expect it to lead to four major shifts:
Demand for high-quality, spatially specific land data will sharply increase. Because the LSRS requires emissions and removals to be tied to clearly defined land areas and supported by traceability systems, companies will need suppliers who can provide farm-level or sourcing region information. Suppliers with strong data systems and verified traceability will, as a result, gain a clear advantage.
To meet the standard’s requirements, procurement strategies will have to shift. For core suppliers, companies must move away from flexible, lowest-cost global sourcing toward longer term stable supplier relationships; they will need to balance traceability, data quality, and land-use practices alongside cost and volume. This implies a rebalancing of incentives: building reliable, ‘Net Zero-ready’ supply chains will become as important as short-term price optimisation.
Early adopters are likely to gain a reputational edge as credible land-sector strategies become an increasing differentiator for customers, investors, and regulators. LSRS-aligned removals may also command a premium, reinforcing the business benefit of early action.
Finally, financial institutions are expected to use the LSRS as a screening tool, redirecting investment toward land strategies that meet the requirements and deliver co-benefits beyond carbon reductions alone. This will also be a crucial enabling condition, with rate of adoption tied closely to investment requirements.
How will corporate climate strategies change as a result?
If a company has material land-use impacts, the LSRS will likely reshape its climate strategy. There are several areas where companies may need to adjust:
Review land-sector actions within business goals and transition plans: Companies should revisit their transition plans to ensure land-related emissions and removals are properly reflected and sequenced. This may shift focus toward reducing emissions at source before turning to removals.
Bring land risks and opportunities into strategy: The standard encourages systematic identification of climate-related risks, such as physical risks to land assets, stored carbon reversals, or policy risks. It also pushes companies to spot opportunities in regenerative practices, soil carbon improvements, and restoration. This strengthens alignment with broader risk management and disclosure frameworks, such as the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive.
Reassess investment allocation: With clearer accounting boundaries, companies may need to revisit capital allocation. Investments in land-use change, regenerative agriculture, restoration, or nature-based removals may need to be evaluated differently considering permanence, uncertainty, and monitoring requirements. Alignment with LSRS may also open opportunities from financial institutions.
Plan for earlier implementation: The LSRS becomes mandatory in 2027, with additional guidance coming in 2026. Companies that begin aligning methodologies now will avoid disruptions to reporting and reputational risks down the line.
Strengthen data and governance: The LSRS raises the bar on transparency and tracking. Companies may need better data collection systems, clearer internal controls, and more robust verification processes.
Avoid overreliance on removals: The standard’s structure reinforces that reducing emissions comes first. Removals are treated distinctly. This may shift strategy away from compensatory approaches and toward deeper decarbonisation of operations and supply chains.
How does this influence existing data requests and supplier engagement?
Supplier engagement is moving from transactional to strategic. Based on what companies want to report and claim, the LSRS requires detailed, traceable, and ongoing data about land use and removals. To do so, companies need to build this into existing processes without overwhelming suppliers.
Data requests become more granular and structured: Companies will need more specific data from suppliers on land use, land-use change, agricultural practices, removals activities, and associated emissions. This includes activity data, management practices, and evidence supporting carbon stocks or removals claims.
Stronger documentation, procedures and contractual requirements come in: Companies may need to formalise their expectations to suppliers. This can range from updated supplier contracts to data-sharing agreements, and from increased requirements around record-keeping to third-party assurance.
Traceability systems need upgrading: Greater transparency will require improved traceability, particularly for commodities linked to land-use change. Companies may need to invest in digital traceability systems, geospatial monitoring, or chain-of-custody certifications.
Check existing certifications: Assess whether existing certification schemes provide sufficient data for LSRS-aligned reporting, or whether they need supplementary information.
Avoid supplier fatigue: A critical strategic point is to avoid layering LSRS-related requests on top of existing data, regulatory, and customer questionnaires. Build them into existing procedures, consolidated and aligned across sustainability, procurement, compliance, and reporting functions instead. Poor coordination risks fatigue, duplication, inconsistent definitions, and supplier disengagement.
Data relationships are no longer a one-off: Land-sector reporting will require ongoing engagement with suppliers to improve data quality, update methodologies, and respond to evolving guidance. This makes supplier education and partnership more important.
Removal claims face greater scrutiny: Where suppliers report carbon removals or regenerative impacts, companies will need clearer evidence on permanence, measurement methods, and risk of reversal. This may require deeper technical conversations, not just data collection.
Prioritise high-risk or high-impact suppliers early: Companies should focus on engagement with suppliers in geographies or sectors with higher land-use change risk, rather than applying uniform pressure across the entire supply base.
Successful implementation starts now
For companies with land-intensive value chains, the question is no longer whether land sector accountability will tighten, but how early they choose to adapt. While aligning with the LSRS may initially slow procurement and reporting as teams adjust to new requirements, companies don’t need to tackle everything at once.
We recommend that companies prioritise what matters most, take a phased approach, and deepen data quality over time, knowing this is only feasible if they start early.
Successful implementation depends on strong internal enablers: robust data systems, governance, and coordination across procurement, sustainability, operations and finance teams. At the same time, leadership is equally critical to unlock the resources needed. Starting now allows companies to move at a manageable pace while building resilient supply chains.
