# Is ISO 14064-1 the same as the GHG Protocol, and which one should my company follow?

Canonical: https://senseible.earth/answers/iso-14064-vs-ghg-protocol

They are not the same, but they agree on the method. The GHG Protocol Corporate Standard sorts emissions into Scopes 1, 2 and 3. ISO 14064-1:2018 sorts them into six categories and is written to be verified. Build one inventory, follow the GHG Protocol by default, and add ISO 14064-1 when a buyer or verifier asks for it.

## How ISO 14064-1 categories map to scopes

The mapping is close but not exact. Write down which Scope 3 categories you placed in each ISO category so a reader can rebuild either view from the same numbers.

- Category 1, direct emissions and removals: Scope 1.
- Category 2, indirect emissions from imported energy: Scope 2.
- Category 3, indirect emissions from transport: mostly Scope 3 Categories 4, 6, 7 and 9.
- Category 4, indirect emissions from products the organisation uses: mostly Scope 3 Categories 1, 2, 3, 5 and 8.
- Category 5, indirect emissions from the use of the organisation's products: mostly Scope 3 Categories 10 to 13.
- Category 6, indirect emissions from other sources: anything left, such as investments.

## Where the two really differ

- Scope 3: the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard makes Scope 3 optional. ISO 14064-1 asks you to assess indirect emissions and report the ones you judge significant, using criteria you set and disclose.
- Removals and biogenic CO2: ISO 14064-1 asks for removals and biogenic CO2 to be quantified and shown separately. The GHG Protocol reports biogenic CO2 outside the scopes.
- Verification: ISO 14064-1 is written to be checked against ISO 14064-3. The GHG Protocol is a reporting standard and does not itself set verification rules.
- Format: ISO 14064-1 has a defined list of report contents. GHG Protocol reports are more flexible.

## A simple decision rule

1. If a buyer, lender or programme names one standard, follow that one.
2. If you plan third-party verification to ISO 14064-3, prepare the inventory to ISO 14064-1.
3. If nobody names a standard, use the GHG Protocol. It is what CDP, BRSR guidance and most buyer questionnaires speak in.
4. In every case keep the activity data, factors and calculations in one place. Both standards use activity multiplied by emission factor, so one data set can serve both reports.

## What does not change between them

Boundaries are set the same way, by control or equity share. The principles are the same: relevance, completeness, consistency, accuracy and transparency. Emission factors, GWP values and base year rules are your choices under both, and must be stated.

## What Senseible does here

Senseible builds Scope 1 and 2 figures from your invoices and bills, with each line traced to its document and factor, and the same data can be laid out by scope or by ISO category. Its reports are self-declared drafts; it does not verify an inventory to ISO 14064-3.

- [ISSA 5000 vs ISAE 3410 vs ISO 14064-3](https://senseible.earth/answers/issa-5000-vs-isae-3410-vs-iso-14064-3)
- [ISO 14067 vs the GHG Protocol Product Standard](https://senseible.earth/climate-intelligence/iso-14067-vs-ghg-protocol-product-standard-explained)
- [Scope 1, 2 and 3 explained](https://senseible.earth/climate-intelligence/scope-1-2-3-emissions-simple-guide-small-business)
- [Can I report only Scope 1 and 2?](https://senseible.earth/answers/can-i-report-only-scope-1-and-2)

Sources: [ISO 14064-1:2018, GHG inventories at organisation level (iso.org)](https://www.iso.org), [GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard, revised edition](https://ghgprotocol.org/corporate-standard), [GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard](https://ghgprotocol.org/corporate-value-chain-scope-3-standard)

Last reviewed 2026-10-15.