Disable your ad blocker to enjoy the full interactive features of this document.

Reporting and Resources

Reporting and Resources

Research from KPMG has found that nearly all of the world’s largest companies are now reporting on sustainability. They are doing so by reporting on material topics in line with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), which requires large businesses to enhance their environmental disclosures by embedding them in annual reports from 2024. These Standards will then be mandated for medium-sized businesses in phases through to 2026.

The influx in quantity and granularity of reporting requirements has been both a burden and a blessing for sustainability professionals. Previous Business Tracker reports from edie have highlighted that in-house sustainability professionals are allocated more time than ever before to reporting and disclosure, but that big frameworks such as CSRD and TNFD are unlocking more value and buy-in internally.

It is easy to see why reporting and disclosure were listed as a business-critical priority by 22% of companies, and a high priority by 48% in our previous Business Tracker report. Indeed, it was the highest ranking priority in terms of in-house sustainability actions listed by respondents at the time.

There have been developments to the reporting regime that have lessened the requirements for a lot of businesses.

The European Commission wants to ‘streamline’ two of its flagship sustainability reporting mandates, under ‘Omnibus’ proposals that will impact how tens of thousands of businesses prepare.

The Omnibus proposals were released on 26 February 2025, following months of speculation and a string of much-criticised closed-door meetings. They are part of the EU’s plan to reduce reporting obligations by 25% for large private firms and 35% for SMEs.

One of the most significant changes in the Omnibus package is the reduction of the CSRD’s scope. Should the EU’s package pass Parliamentary votes, around 80% of companies originally set to be subject to mandatory CSRD requirements will be exempt. The Commission wants to shift the focus to the largest companies only.

Q. What is your view on the proposed changes to the CSRD scope of influence and timeframes?

▉ It will help streamline sustainability reporting – 33%

▉ It weakens the Directive too much – 43%

▉ It won't change much about overall reporting requirements – 24%

In July, dozens of businesses, investors, and industry bodies called on EU policymakers to preserve critical parts of the green finance taxonomy and sustainability reporting rules as they push forward with simplification plans.

Signatory businesses to a letter sent to the EU include Allianz, First Sentier Investors, Mirova, Triodos Bank, EDF, Nokia, Ingka Group (Ikea), Oatly, Signif,y and Vattenfall.

Supporting groups include Eurosif, the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC), Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI), Corporate Leaders Group Europe (CLG Europe), the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), and E3G.

Unsurprisingly, the number of edie respondents who are working towards CSRD has dropped substantially. Across all previous quarterly surveys prior to the Omnibus decision, eight in ten (80%) were prioritising CSRD reporting, regardless of whether they fell under the scheme. CSRD is not viewed as a “high” or “business critical” priority by just 19%, and 69% of respondents do not fall under the CSRD remit.

Of 31% of organisations that do fall into CSRD reporting remits, a total of 81% have started reporting and disclosure procedures, and just 14% have completed their first CSRD report.

Businesses have mixed views on whether the Omnibus will help sustainability reporting. Of those that fall under the CSRD remit, 43% believe that the Omnibus will weaken the Directive too much, 33% believe it will help sustainability reporting, and 24% do not believe much will change.

Internal engagement

Despite the external constraints mentioned in this report, it is clear that business is becoming more engrained within businesses. What was once a siloed practice is not being supported by other key departments.

Survey respondents revealed thar areas including the board, the legal team and finance departments are far more engaged with sustainability than they are disengaged. Of the departments listed in the survey, finance and legal and the least engaged with corporate sustainability efforts, but this comes out at just 9% respectively. Promisingly, 90% of chief executives are either somewhat or highly engaged with the sustainability agenda, with almost 50% of chief executives “highly engaged” – the highest scoring function across the survey.

Q. How engaged are each of the following departments with sustainability and climate action in your organisation?

Not at all engaged with sustainability
Somewhat disengaged with sustainability
Neither engaged nor disengaged
Somewhat engaged with sustainability
Highly engaged with sustainability
Chief executive
1%
4%
5%
41%
49%
Corporate board
1%
4%
8
49%
38%
Legal
2%
9%
32%
33%
24%
Finance
4%
5%
31%
33%
27%
HR
2%
8%
19%
39%
32%
Marketing/Communications
0%
5%
12%
30%
53%
Procurement/ Supply chain
2%
3%
17%
42%
36%
Operations
1%
3%
22%
39%
35%

Go to your membership hub

Support

About us

Contact

Advertise

General links

Cookie policy

Environmental policy

Privacy policy

Editorial complaints

Feedback

© 2025 edie