Data, Technology & Verification Systems
Accuracy
A core quality principle for emissions and sustainability data: reported values should be systematically neither over- nor understated, with uncertainty reduced as far as practicable.
Definition
In greenhouse gas accounting, the principle that the quantification of emissions should be systematically neither over nor under actual emissions, as far as can be judged, and that uncertainties should be reduced as far as practicable — sufficient for users to make decisions with reasonable assurance (GHG Protocol Corporate Standard, Chapter 1). Accuracy is one of the Protocol's five accounting principles, alongside relevance, completeness, consistency and transparency.
References
Source standard for the five GHG accounting principles.
Verbatim statement of the accuracy principle from the Corporate Standard, Chapter 1 (neither over nor under actual emissions; uncertainties reduced as far as practicable).
IPCC inventory good-practice framework within which accuracy is applied at national level.
Overview
What it means
Accuracy is pursued through choices of methodology, emission factors and activity data quality, and is reported with uncertainty characterisation rather than as a claim of perfect measurement. IPCC good practice for national inventories likewise includes accuracy among its inventory quality principles, applying the same idea at national scale.
How it is used
Preparers of corporate inventories apply the principle when selecting calculation methods; verifiers and assurance providers test whether reported figures are free from material misstatement. Regulators and disclosure regimes that build on the GHG Protocol inherit the principle.
Why it matters
Carbon markets, targets and disclosure regimes all depend on numbers that are decision-useful. Systematic over- or under-statement — even where unintentional — undermines crediting, comparability and trust in reported progress.
Definitions and controversy
Accuracy is a qualitative principle, not a numerical threshold; what counts as "sufficient" accuracy depends on the intended use of the data.
Review
Public comments appear only after editor acceptance. Draft comments stay in the review queue.
Reviewers choose the definition or an overview paragraph, leave a comment or replacement, and attach evidence or a source link.
Editors compare reviewer cards side by side. AI may help find agreement, conflicts, unsupported claims and possible source issues.
Only an editor-accepted synthesis changes the public page. Reviewer identities are shown only with consent and an editorial decision to attribute them.
Submitted reviews stay private until an editor decides whether to accept and attribute them.
Contribute to this entry
Help improve this definition
Your contribution is private while it is checked. Nothing changes on this page unless an editor accepts it.
Loading verified endorsements… Endorsements are not votes and never determine publication.
Endorse this definition
Endorse the exact version shown here. This is not a vote, and publication remains an editorial decision.
Review board
Comment on a specific line. Each reviewer stays separate until an editor accepts a merged draft.
Each person comments on the definition or overview in their own draft card, with role, evidence and suggested wording kept together.
AI can compare comments against the current text, flag conflicting claims, surface missing evidence and identify where reviewers agree.
An editor merges compatible suggestions into a draft change, checks sources, records disagreements and decides what can be published.