Skip navigation

How does Better Futures Australia avoid Greenwashing?


Principles, Criteria and Metrics are applied for the onboarding and progression of Better Futures Australia signatories.

We aspire to work with a suite of diverse climate champions, leading by example in their respective sectors. While every actor may not yet have an ambitious net-zero or Paris aligned target, we also want to meet actors where they are. Which means, we would like to have a certain criteria for entry and then support that actor along the journey to net-zero emissions by 2050. 

The Alliances for Climate Action principles of credibility, transparency, progressivity, and collaboration form the basis of the criteria.



Metric/Indicator [Entry/Onboarding]

Metric/Indicator [Progression] 

1.Credibility = Leading by Example

The institution is already taking, or seeking to take climate “action” individually


a.Verifiable commitment to climate action:

  • Action [required]: GHG emission reduction measures in place (minimum); GHG emission reduction targets (if available) 
  • Advocacy / Public Engagement [optional]: Specific actions planned/taken to build public/decision-maker support for climate action  

b. No previous lobbying against climate action: Demonstration that

  • The actor  has NOT lobbied against progressive climate policies
  • The actor is NOT currently a part of a trade association that has actively lobbied against progressive climate policies
  • Nor does it speak publicly against climate action broadly and the Paris Agreement specifically 

a. Verifiable progression on climate action (across three pillars) aligned with the goals of the Paris Agreement: 

  • Action: Institution has (i) set GHG emission reduction targets (2050/2030) and (ii) committed to GHG emission reduction measures aligned with 1.5C [with progressively stronger targets]
  • Advocacy:Institution (i) advocates for policies consistent with BFA and ACA goals; (ii) aligns its position relative to its trade association based on ACA goals; and (iii) allocates advocacy spending to advance BFA and ACA goals ( AAA Framework) [with progressively stronger engagement; e.g. as per WASI Engagement Ladder]
  • Public Engagement: Institution speaks up on climate action in alignment with BFA and ACA goals


The institution is implementing its actions and delivering demonstrable results


Institution makes demonstrable progress towards its action targets, and increased engagement on both progressive climate advocacy and public engagement in line with 1.5C

2. Progressivity = do more overtime

The institution is committed to taking greater climate action individually that works towards net-zero emissions by 2050

Commitment to take more ambitious action (as per 3 pillars) in line with ACA vision / foundational declaration (signature as verifier)

See above

3. Transparency  = disclose publicly

Commitment is documented and available internally/externally


Institution discloses its targets by annually reporting its  progress to CDP with a progressively higher degree of transparency.[e.g. as per CDP’s 4 stages?] 

4. Collaboration = work with others (peers / other constituencies / BFA and ACA network) to address climate crisis


Commitment to work with others in line with the BFA and ACA vision / foundational declaration (signature as verifier)

Institution actively collaborates with other constituencies in coalition across 3 primary pillars + supports BFA and ACA network activities