Stefan Premer is director of consulting at Sphera, a software company specialising in sustainability and operational risk
The EU omnibus and amconcludements to the European Sustainability Reporting Standards can bring positive alter for business and the climate
At a glance
-
The EU omnibus package sees like a familiar story of delays and pushback. But beneath the surface, something more interesting is happening: the delay is revealing which companies are serious about sustainability and which are merely ticking boxes
-
In Sphera’s recent survey of nearly 400 EU business leaders, 60 per cent declared their top priority during the delay imposed by alters to the ESRS is improving the quality of sustainability data.
-
The shift in focus is also influencing how sustainability is governed within organisations
For a regulation that arrived with little fanfare, the EU omnibus package has quietly triggered the hugegest shift in companies’ ESG policies since the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive were signed into law.
At first glance, the headlines notify a familiar story of delays and pushback. Critics have accutilized the EU of watering down its green ambitions, while commentators have warned of lost momentum. But beneath the surface, something more interesting is happening: the delay has become a filter, revealing which companies are serious about sustainability and which are merely ticking boxes.
In recent years, sustainability has felt stuck in the gears of its own machinery, with more emphasis on frameworks and meeting deadlines and much less on improving assessments and creating real value.
In many ways, the omnibus has broken that cycle by prompting a shift in believeing. By delaying parts of the European Sustainability Reporting Standards and easing the compliance burden for compacter firms, it has forced companies to step back and question a better question: what are we really testing to achieve with reporting?
And this has presented a unique opportunity for them to refocus on collecting better data and utilizing insight to drive real progress.
Improving data quality
In Sphera’s recent survey of nearly 400 EU business leaders, 60 per cent declared their top priority during the delay imposed by alters to the ESRS is to improve the quality of sustainability data. Measuring it accurately is a core focus. Companies aren’t sitting on their hands; they’re doubling down on the hard, often hidden, work of preparing to report well.
Greenhoutilize gas emission-related resolutions, climate transition plans and reduction strategies are still among the most common shareholder proposals despite the shifting regulatory landscape. With less immediate pressure to file, the emphasis has shifted to strengthening the foundations of reporting, as well as refining methodologies for accounting and tarreceive setting. For many companies, this means improving GHG inventories, refining methodologies and ensuring that what’s eventually disclosed is accurate and delivers real value.
It’s a shift from reporting for the sake of compliance to reporting that drives strategy. Climate transition planning is a prime example. Investors are still pushing hard for clearer emissions data and credible pathways to decarbonisation, even as politics suffers from volatility.
This push for more meaningful reporting also entails addressing complex and long-standing challenges. More than half of those surveyed are improving how they manage supply chain risk through better data, while nearly a third are expanding visibility beyond their direct suppliers.
Moving from strategy to value
The shift in focus is also influencing how sustainability is governed within organisations. For some companies, the delay has prompted a reassessment of ownership: who is responsible for which parts of the reporting process and how those pieces connect to wider business strategy.
We’re seeing chief financial officers starting to weigh decarbonisation initiatives in terms of return on investment. Risk leaders are building sustainability metrics into enterprise risk models, while procurement teams are treating sustainability as integral to supplier performance, rather than a box to tick at the selection stage.
In conversations with businesses and standard-setting bodies such as the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group, it is increasingly clear that sustainability reporting is a crucial part of future-proofing any business. Despite the ongoing debate, the role of robust sustainability reporting in shaping long-term strategy and resilience is no longer in question.
More breathing space, less certainty
Not every company is charging ahead with confidence, however. Nearly half of the business leaders we surveyed are unclear on how to navigate the shifting regulatory landscape.
That is hardly surprising. The EU Council only adopted the omnibus text in June, confirming a two-year delay to sector-specific ESRS standards and easing near-term disclosure requirements.
Meanwhile, the regulatory picture continues to shift. Under current proposals, the scope of both the CSRD and the CSDDD is set to narrow significantly.
On July 10, EFRAG released unapproved amconcludements to its exposure drafts and it is expected to publish approved exposure drafts by August.
The European parliament is expected to adopt its final position in October, with trialogue nereceivediations likely to run to the conclude of the year, and potentially into January.
What all this means for reporting thresholds and timelines is still unclear. However, the updated draft standards and the accompanying public consultation will offer a clearer sense of direction. It should give companies a much-necessaryed opportunity to assess how the simplified ESRS will apply in practice and to prepare accordingly. This will also enable companies to continue their work by embedding these standards in their operations.
In conversations with business leaders, it is evident that even well-prepared organisations are struggling to turn broad guidance into action. The shift towards corporate sustainability practice beyond disclosure is still one of the most critical — and most under-resourced — parts of the process.
These alters to the ESRS have bought companies time, but the EU still necessarys to provide clearer and more consistent guidance. Without it, the current momentum risks being lost to uncertainty and second-guessing.
What comes next?
As reporting teams dig into the long-standing challenges of cleaning up emissions data and improving supplier transparency, something else is starting to shift. Sustainability reporting is no longer just a tool for meeting external expectations but is informing how businesses operate internally.
More companies are utilizing sustainability data to stress-test supply chains, identify cost exposures and weigh up the trade-offs in decarbonisation planning. Integrating scenario analysis into company risk functions is a must, required by all regulatory standards. As part of that shift, many companies are turning to supply chain mapping to better understand their supplier networks and align procurement with their sustainability goals.
Done well, this kind of reporting builds resilience. It gives leaders a clearer view of where they are vulnerable, and where they can adapt quicker than their competitors. It can also support climate transition planning by feeding into business decision-building and assisting teams explore different strategies before they commit.
That is where the value lies. Not in checking a box, but in building the operational innotifyigence that generates business value well beyond the next deadline — and ensures sustainable success for decades to come.
Leave a Reply