NAIROBI, Kenya, Feb 9 — “Carbon neutral by 2030” has become a central goal in Kenya’s corporate sustainability efforts, featuring prominently in investor briefings, annual reports, and media statements as companies respond to growing decarbonisation pressures and global climate expectations.
But ambition is not arithmetic. And net-zero is ultimately a numbers test.
Under internationally recognised standards such as the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), a credible net-zero claim requires companies to cut emissions deeply across operations and value chains — typically by around 90 per cent — before neutralising the small residual share with verified carbon removals.
Offsets are permitted only after steep reductions and only if they meet strict criteria on permanence, additionality and independent verification.
The question facing Kenyan firms is therefore not whether they have climate strategies, but whether their baselines, reduction pathways and timelines align with this scientific framework.
Dr. Edward Mungai, Lead Consultant and Partner at Impact Africa Consulting Limited, argues that part of the credibility gap stems from a misunderstanding of what sustainability actually means.
“Sustainability is not philanthropy,” he says. “It is simply doing good as good business.”
Mungai draws a sharp distinction between sustainability as an outcome and ESG as the pathway.
“Sustainability is the end goal — development that meets the needs of the present without compromising future generations. ESG is the route you take to get there. Environment, social and governance are the tools.”
He is particularly critical of how many companies frame corporate social responsibility.
“CSR is not Corporate Social Responsibility,” he says. “Too often, it is cosmetic social responsibility.”
The implication for corporate climate pledges is clear. Tree planting drives, headline commitments and isolated green projects cannot substitute for structural emissions reductions embedded in business models, supply chains and governance systems.
Safaricom has positioned itself as one of the most structured companies in Kenya’s corporate climate transition, committing to net-zero emissions by 2050 rather than claiming carbon neutrality by 2030.
Its 2025 Sustainable Business Report shows total greenhouse gas emissions of 75,116 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO₂e) in FY2025, up from 68,034 tCO₂e in FY2024 — a 10.4 per cent increase.
Scope 1 emissions rose to 35,809 tCO₂e, Scope 2 (market-based) declined to 3,560 tCO₂e, and Scope 3 emissions increased to 35,746 tCO₂e.
The increase reflects network expansion and regional growth. Yet under science-based pathways, emissions must begin falling sharply within this decade for a 2050 commitment to remain credible.
If the FY2025 total of 75,116 tCO₂e were treated as a baseline, a 90 per cent reduction would require emissions to fall to roughly 7,500 tCO₂e by 2050 — eliminating about 67,600 tonnes over 25 years.
That transition would require sustained annual reductions rather than annual growth.
Mungai argues that this is precisely where Kenyan companies must shift their mindset.
“We must stop treating sustainability as something for big multinationals only,” he says. “It is about competitiveness, access to capital and risk management.”
He points to tightening disclosure standards as a structural driver. International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) S1 and S2 will require sustainability and climate-related financial disclosures beginning in coming years.
The Nairobi Securities Exchange already requires listed firms to report sustainability performance under Global Reporting Initiative standards, while the Central Bank of Kenya has directed banks to align with climate risk disclosure frameworks.
“We are at a stage where disclosure is no longer optional,” Mungai says. “Investors are asking different questions. It is no longer just about profit. It is about profit with impact.”
He argues that sustainability strategies, when properly integrated, can unlock new revenue streams, reduce operating costs through energy efficiency, and lower regulatory and litigation risk.
Poor governance, environmental damage or labour rights violations now carry reputational and financial consequences that can travel quickly across global supply chains.
“Sustainability is about managing risk and creating value at the same time,” he says. “If it makes business sense, you do it — regardless of politics.”
The arithmetic, however, remains central. Whether in telecommunications, brewing, banking or agriculture, net-zero claims will increasingly be judged not on aspiration but on disclosed baselines, Scope 3 coverage, absolute emissions trends and verified offset quality.
Kenyan firms have made measurable progress in renewable energy adoption, reporting standards and board-level oversight.
But as global climate scrutiny intensifies, the decisive test will be whether emissions fall in absolute terms, and if they do fast enough.
Ambition may define the narrative but in climate accounting, it is still the numbers that determine credibility.
