We live in an era where misinformation often outpaces the truth. From manipulated images to misleading corporate claims, trust in content and commitments is being tested like never before.

This blog looks into the importance of clear, authentic and trustworthy reporting of sustainability to businesses.

The Current Situation of Sustainability Reporting

As scrutiny around corporate sustainability claims intensifies, companies are walking a fine line between transparency and perception, keen to showcase progress but wary of accusations of greenwashing. At the same time, fear of backlash has led some companies to underreport their achievements, a phenomenon known as greenhushing.

Both approaches have left stakeholders questioning corporate commitments, fuelling scepticism and disengagement.

As misinformation continues to spread, businesses face increasing challenges in distinguishing themselves from those making misleading claims about their sustainability efforts.

A 2023 YouGov survey revealed that 55% of global consumers are skeptical of brands' sustainability claims.

In this climate, transparent and authentic sustainability reporting has become essential for companies seeking to stand apart and demonstrate their true commitment to positive impact.

The value of transparent reporting

Transparent reporting serves as the foundation for building long-term business resilience. It enables organisations to:

• Build trust and accountability with customers, investors, and other key stakeholders.
• Enhance decision-making by leveraging data-driven insights for sustainability strategies.
• Align with global reporting standards and regulatory requirements.
• Mitigate risks associated with misinformation, greenwashing, and reputational damage, including non-compliance with regulations.
• Attract investors who prioritise environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance.
• Drive continuous improvement by tracking progress against clear goals and metrics.
• Strengthen stakeholder engagement through honest and meaningful communication.

"94% of consumers are more likely to be loyal to a brand that's completely transparent" - Forbes, 2024

Examples of the risks of not adopting transparency about sustainability reporting

• Volkswagen’s "Clean Diesel" (2015)

Volkswagen falsely marketed its diesel vehicles as environmentally friendly, while secretly installing software to cheat emissions tests. The cars emitted up to 40 times the legal limit of nitrogen oxides.

Over $30 billion in fines, settlements, and vehicle recalls. Reputational Damage: A massive loss of consumer trust, leading to a decline in sales and stock value.

Several executives faced legal action, with some receiving prison sentences.

• H&M’s "Conscious Collection" (2022)

H&M promoted its "Conscious Collection" as sustainable, but investigations found the brand used misleading sustainability claims without substantial proof. Some garments were found to have a higher environmental impact than standard items.

The company was sued for misleading marketing practices.

The controversy damaged H&M’s reputation, with consumers calling for boycotts.

Increased global pressure for stricter regulations on corporate sustainability claims.

• Nestlé’s "Sustainable" Bottled Water Claims (2018)

Nestlé marketed its bottled water brands as sustainably sourced, while investigations revealed excessive water extraction from drought-prone areas and misleading claims about bottle recyclability.

Multiple lawsuits and investigations in the US and Canada over misleading environmental claims.

Consumer advocacy groups called for boycotts and stronger regulations against Nestlé’s sustainability claims.

• Ryanair’s "Lowest Emissions Airline" Advertisement (2020)

Ryanair ran ads claiming to be "Europe’s lowest emissions airline," despite failing to provide sufficient evidence to back up the claim.

The UK’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) banned the ads for misleading consumers.

Highlighted as an example of greenwashing, damaging Ryanair’s brand credibility.

What authentic sustainability reporting looks like

Companies that prioritise transparency in their sustainability efforts provide clear, honest metrics that accurately reflect their ESG impact. This approach goes beyond vague claims, ensuring disclosures are grounded in data-driven insights and acknowledging the challenges faced along the way.

Recognising the signs of inauthenticity in sustainability reporting is crucial for ensuring transparency and accountability. Common signs include:

• Lack of verifiable data
• Vague or ambiguous goals
• Cherry-picking data or selective reporting
• Reliance on vague and unsubstantiated language
• Failure to address material issues
• Inadequate stakeholder engagement
• Lack of transparency about data limitations and methodologies
• Inconsistent reporting over time
• Loose alignment with recognised frameworks and standards
• Misleading imagery and design

Getting sustainability reporting right and ensuring transparency can be challenging. Businesses often face obstacles such as difficulties with data collection, inconsistency across reporting practices, and navigating complex reporting standards.

FuturePlus has collaborated with a variety of organisations and businesses to create Impact Reports, which clearly demonstrate the business’ current impact but also the commitments to improve moving forward.

They include Soho House, Heckfield Place and Oxwash

Has your organisation experienced similar challenges? Don’t worry, we’re here to simplify the process and guide you through every step.

How we can help

Our consultancy team collaborates with you to create bespoke sustainability reporting that:
Deliver an engaging and authentic narrative of your sustainability journey.

• Highlight your achievements and ongoing efforts.
• Align sustainability initiatives with your broader business strategy.
• Maintain a balance between transparency, ambition, and accountability.
• Outline any challenges faced and your goals.

Get in touch today to learn how we can help you with your sustainability reporting.