Sustainability Reporting Trends in 2026: What Serious Businesses Need to Watch
- David Owo
- 7 days ago
- 5 min read
Sustainability reporting is no longer a specialist exercise handled once a year and forgotten. In 2026, it sits where decisions are made: in loan committees, board meetings, procurement talks, and even sales pitches.
Banks use these reports to judge risk and resilience. Investors scan them to decide which companies to back and which ones to avoid. Customers, from large corporates to public buyers, use them to select partners that can withstand the next wave of climate regulations, supply‑chain shocks, and social expectations.
For any business that wants to stay credible, win contracts, and access finance, understanding the main sustainability reporting trends in 2026 is not a “nice to have.” It is part of staying in the game.
1. More companies are being pulled into mandatory rules
In 2026, more companies will be subject to compulsory sustainability reporting requirements, particularly in Europe. The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) phases mean large companies, listed SMEs, financial institutions, and some non‑EU groups active in the EU must publish detailed sustainability reports using common standards.
Even when smaller suppliers are not directly in scope, they feel the pressure. Large firms now request emissions figures, social data, and governance details to meet their CSRD obligations and value‑chain reporting requirements.
If you want to do more than just react to new questionnaires, start by turning this article into a practical checklist. Pick one or two trends, for example, the CSRD guide for SMEs or the sustainability KPI dashboard, and decide what you will change in your reporting over the next 90 days.
2. Double materiality stops boilerplate reporting
The second major trend is the rise of double materiality as a standard expectation. Instead of simply listing “important topics,” companies must show both how sustainability issues affect their finances and how their activities affect people and the environment.
This reduces space for generic, copy‑paste reports. It forces management teams to make clear choices, explain why certain topics matter, and show how those topics link to strategy, risk, and long‑term value.
3. Value‑chain and Scope 3 data move centre stage
In 2026, sustainability reporting is no longer limited to what happens “within our own walls.”For many sectors, the largest emissions, social risks, and resource impacts occur upstream and downstream in the value chain, not at headquarters.
Key patterns emerging:
Large companies are mapping Scope 3 emissions (especially purchased goods, transport, and product use) and then following up with suppliers with detailed questions.
Buyers increasingly expect suppliers to share basic climate, labour, and waste metrics rather than vague statements.
Suppliers that provide clear, consistent data will become preferred partners; those that cannot may be seen as a risk.
If you are a supplier now facing detailed ESG questions from bigger customers, start with our Starter Compliance Pack to organise your first ESG request, evidence folder, and summary in a structured way. Once the basics are in place, use our ESG Data support to keep your numbers up to date so future questionnaires become faster and far less stressful.
4. Standardisation and sector‑specific requirements
The third trend is a move away from “pick any framework.”Regulators and standard‑setters push companies toward harmonised standards so investors, banks, and civil society can compare performance across firms and sectors.
In practice, this means:
The European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) define detailed data points for topics such as climate, pollution, workers, and governance.
Sector‑specific requirements are being developed to make metrics more relevant to manufacturing, finance, and agriculture.
Voluntary simplified standards, such as the VSME framework, are emerging to help SMEs report in a way that still integrates with the broader system.
For readers, this reduces confusion and improves comparability. For companies, it raises the bar: simply choosing an easy framework is no longer enough.
5. From stories to metrics, targets, and progress
Stakeholders in 2026 are losing patience with slogans and long narrative sections that lack evidence. They want to see a clear baseline, specific targets, and measurable progress over time.
The strongest reports now follow a simple pattern:
Baseline: a chosen year with clear numbers (for example, emissions, energy, injury rates, diversity).
Targets: short‑ and medium‑term goals with dates and values, not just “we aim to improve.”
Progress: year‑on‑year figures that show whether the company is on track.
Examples include:
Emissions per euro of revenue with a set reduction percentage by 2030.
Women in management with a clear percentage target and timeline.
Waste to landfill as a share of total waste is trending downward each year.
6. Digital reporting, data quality, and AI support
As reporting becomes more data‑heavy, companies are rethinking how they collect, store, and present information. Spreadsheets are still common, but many organisations are shifting to integrated platforms where sustainability data sits alongside finance and operations data.
New trends include:
Use of AI to estimate emissions from incomplete data sets, especially in Scope 3 categories.
Automated checks to flag outliers, gaps, or inconsistencies before data goes into reports.
Structured, machine‑readable formats that let regulators and investors analyse information at scale.
However, automation brings new responsibilities. Companies must be able to explain the methods, emission factors, and assumptions behind every key figure, even if a tool produced the first estimate.
7. Assurance and scrutiny tighten
Another clear shift in 2026 is the demand for assurance on sustainability information. For many CSRD‑covered companies, at least limited assurance from an external provider is required, with a possible transition to reasonable assurance over time.
This changes how sustainability teams work:
Evidence must be collected and stored in the same manner as financial documentation.
Calculation methods for key indicators (especially greenhouse gas emissions) must be documented and applied consistently.
Internal controls and responsibilities for sustainability data are being formalised.
As regulators and investors become more comfortable reading sustainability information, they also become more critical. Reports that cannot be backed up with solid data or methodology are at higher risk of challenge.
8. Greenwashing rules and litigation risk
As sustainability claims multiply, regulators are tightening rules against misleading statements. New guidance and enforcement actions on “green” and “carbon neutral” claims mean marketing and reporting teams must exercise greater care.
Key trends here:
Vague phrases like “eco‑friendly,” without numbers or a clear scope, are increasingly challenged.
Firms are expected to explain what they mean by “net‑zero,” including boundaries, timelines, and reliance on offsets.
Consumer groups and NGOs are filing more lawsuits against companies over claims that lack supporting evidence.
This pushes companies toward plainer language and stronger, documented metrics. It also encourages legal and compliance teams to work more closely with sustainability and marketing when drafting new claims.
9. Integration with strategy, risk, and finance
Perhaps the deepest trend is that sustainability reporting is moving from the edge of the business to its centre. Boards, CEOs, and CFOs are being asked to show exactly how climate, resource, and social issues shape decisions on investment, product design, and long‑term planning.
This shows up in several ways:
More boards with formal sustainability oversight and clear responsibilities.
Capital allocation policies that explicitly reference climate targets or social commitments.
Executive pay components linked to measurable sustainability outcomes, not just financial performance.
Investors and lenders increasingly view sustainability information as an additional lens into management quality. Reports that show genuine links between data, strategy, and capital decisions stand out from those that treat sustainability as a separate, cosmetic document.