In partnership with Chain.io, we supported industry research to understand the complexities of CO2 compliance and data management, offering insights and best practices for shippers, supply chain teams, LSPs, and other stakeholders. Today, we are sharing everything Chain.io found in their research, including real practices and advice from shippers who are in all phases of their CO2 compliance journey.

CO2 reporting is no longer a voluntary exercise for companies with international supply chains. Regulatory pressure from the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), the SEC’s climate disclosure rules, and emerging country-level mandates are making emissions data a compliance requirement — not merely a sustainability talking point. For shippers, this means that accurate, audit-ready emissions data is becoming as important as your customs documentation and financial records.

Why CO2 Data Management Is a Supply Chain Priority

The challenge for most companies is not the willingness to report emissions — it is the quality and accessibility of the underlying data. Freight emissions span multiple modes, carriers, subcontractors, and geographies. Consolidating that data into a coherent, verifiable emissions report requires the kind of data integration infrastructure that most supply chain teams have not yet built.

The research conducted by Chain.io identified several recurring themes among shippers at varying stages of CO2 compliance maturity:

• Data fragmentation — emissions data lives across carrier portals, freight invoices, customs entries, and ERP systems, with no single source of truth
• Methodology inconsistencies — different carriers and logistics providers calculate CO2 using different emission factors and scope definitions, making consolidation error-prone
• Scope 3 complexity — freight emissions fall under Scope 3 (indirect emissions from the value chain), which is the most difficult category to measure accurately and consistently
• Lack of real-time visibility — most shippers receive emissions data weeks or months after shipments are complete, making in-period adjustments impossible
• Audit readiness gaps — many companies have begun collecting emissions data without ensuring it meets the evidentiary standards that regulators or auditors will require

Global CO2 Regulations and Sustainability Frameworks

The regulatory landscape for supply chain emissions is evolving rapidly. Shippers operating internationally need to understand which frameworks apply to their business and what level of data granularity each requires. Key frameworks and regulations currently shaping CO2 reporting requirements include:

1. EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) — requires large companies and EU-listed companies to report detailed Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions with third-party assurance
2. Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) — imposes a carbon price on imports of certain goods into the EU, requiring importers to report and verify the embedded carbon content of their products
3. SEC Climate Disclosure Rules — U.S. publicly listed companies face new requirements to disclose material climate-related risks and greenhouse gas emissions in their regulatory filings
4. International Maritime Organization (IMO) decarbonization targets — ocean carriers face their own mandatory emissions reduction pathways, which will ultimately be reflected in the services and costs they pass on to shippers
5. Voluntary frameworks — including the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) and the Global Logistics Emissions Council (GLEC) framework, which set industry standards for how freight emissions should be measured and reported

Understanding which of these frameworks applies to your organization — and which your customers or investors may be asking you to comply with — is the starting point for building a credible CO2 reporting program. Our trade advisory services team can help you map your regulatory obligations and identify the data collection requirements that follow.

Best Practices for CO2 Compliance

The Chain.io research, informed by interviews with shippers across industries and compliance maturity levels, identified a clear set of best practices that distinguish companies making real progress on emissions reporting from those still struggling with data quality issues.

The most important insight: CO2 compliance is a data infrastructure problem before it is a sustainability problem. Companies that invest in connecting their logistics data — across modes, carriers, and geographies — unlock accurate emissions reporting as a downstream benefit of that investment.

• Start with a data audit — map every source of freight transaction data in your organization and assess whether it captures the information needed to calculate emissions (weight, distance, mode, carrier, fuel type)
• Standardize on a single emissions methodology — adopt the GLEC framework or an equivalent standard across all carrier relationships to ensure comparability
• Integrate data at the transaction level — per-shipment emissions data is far more accurate and useful than portfolio-level estimates; prioritize carrier integrations that provide shipment-level emissions certificates
• Build for auditability from day one — store raw data alongside calculated emissions figures so that your methodology can be traced and validated by auditors
• Track emissions by trade lane and mode — understanding where emissions are concentrated in your network is the prerequisite for meaningful reduction strategies

The Role of Data Integration in Accurate CO2 Reporting

The pivotal role of data integration in ensuring accuracy and efficiency in CO2 reporting cannot be overstated. Manual data collection — pulling emissions certificates from carrier portals, reformatting them into spreadsheets, and reconciling across different methodologies — is not scalable and is highly error-prone. It is also the approach that most companies are currently using.

Automated data integration, by contrast, allows emissions data to flow directly from carriers and logistics providers into a central platform alongside freight cost, transit time, and shipment status data. This means emissions reporting becomes a byproduct of the same data infrastructure that powers your supply chain visibility software — not a separate and burdensome process layered on top of it.

The connection to broader supply chain performance is direct. Companies that use a Control Tower platform to manage their freight operations are in a far better position to layer in emissions reporting because the underlying data connections already exist. The incremental effort to add CO2 data to an existing integration is far smaller than building emissions reporting from scratch on top of a fragmented data environment.

Taking Action: Where to Start

For shippers who are beginning their CO2 compliance journey, the most important thing is to start with honest visibility into where you currently stand. That means:

1. Assessing your current emissions data quality — what do you actually have, at what level of granularity, and how was it calculated?
2. Identifying your near-term regulatory obligations — which frameworks apply to your business, and what are the deadlines?
3. Mapping your data gaps — which modes, carriers, or trade lanes are currently missing from your emissions picture?
4. Prioritizing carrier integrations — which logistics partners represent the largest share of your emissions footprint and should be connected first?
5. Building toward a continuous reporting cadence — the goal is monthly or quarterly emissions reporting that feeds into your sustainability disclosures without a manual scramble each period

CargoTrans is committed to helping clients navigate the evolving intersection of supply chain challenges and sustainability compliance. If you want to understand how your freight operations map against current CO2 reporting requirements and best practices, we are here to help. All you have to do is contact us.