The 5 must-read ESG/sustainability news stories

Here are the 5 key takeaways from the past few weeks.

1) CSRD: the first sustainability reports show growing maturity on climate issues… but progress remains uneven

According to the initial findings from the 2025 sustainability reports, published by the Institute for Sustainable Finance (IFD) at the end of March, 98% of European companies identify climate change as a material issue. The topic is therefore firmly established in the materiality analyses carried out by companies.

But behind this near-consensus, significant gaps remain regarding climate-related sub-issues:

• 97% of companies consider the carbon transition (mitigation) to be a material issue,

• compared with 70% for adaptation,

• and fewer than 15% currently publish a financial quantification of climate risks.

The picture is the same regarding transition plans: they are more structured because of the CSRD and ESRS, but still highly varied in terms of Scope 3, investments linked to these plans, the operational nature of the roadmaps, and the integration of adaptation issues within them.

The report sets out best practices for implementing the CSRD.

Why this matters: the challenge is not merely to declare climate as material. It is also to translate this into quantified analyses, investment decisions, governance and action plans that can be effectively implemented.

2) ISSB / ESRS: towards more direct recognition of European reporting?

According to AEF Info, on 16 March at the European Parliament, ISSB Chair Emmanuel Faber indicated that a solution was being considered to allow companies reporting under ESRS standards to obtain “direct and full adoption” status under ISSB standards. The only requirement would be that “all reports be drafted in such a way as to clearly provide all relevant financial information, without being obscured by information intended for other users. (...) European companies could thus prepare their ISSB reporting within their CSRD report, which would facilitate the work of companies requiring an ISSB framework for their international reporting across different jurisdictions,” explained Emmanuel Faber.

In other words: a way of simplifying the international recognition of European reporting, by eventually removing the interoperability mechanism currently used between the two frameworks. Discussions are still ongoing with the European Commission, EFRAG, auditors and preparers.

The underlying message: for groups operating across multiple jurisdictions, this would provide a practical lever to reduce the effort required to reconcile different reporting frameworks, without abandoning the European approach to double materiality.

3) Scope 3: the GHG Protocol is preparing a more stringent framework

According to ESG Today, the GHG Protocol has put forward several proposals for revising its Scope 3 standard. Among the proposed changes:

• A requirement to cover at least 95% of Scope 3 emissions to be compliant: “Companies must account for all their Scope 3 emissions and disclose and justify any exclusions”. “This requirement ensures that all major activities attributable to a reporting company’s operations (in order of emissions significance) are included in that company’s Scope 3 emissions inventory,” states the GHG Protocol;

• The possible creation of a new Category 16 for certain value chain emissions that are currently poorly or inadequately covered, such as certain facilitated emissions or those linked to licences.

• The draft also provides for adjustments to Category 15 relating to investments, with an important clarification: it would apply not only to asset managers, but to all companies.

Key takeaway: Scope 3 remains the key challenge in climate reporting. The trend is clear: greater completeness, greater transparency, and higher standards for data quality. For companies, this means a growing need for methodological robustness across the entire value chain.

4) ISO publishes a standard on the eco-design of digital services

In February 2026, ISO published the first part of its standard dedicated to eco-practices applicable to the entire life cycle of digital services:

1. requirements specification,

2. design,

3. service implementation,

4. operation,

5. maintenance and end-of-life.

The aim is to propose a voluntary international framework for integrating eco-design into digital services, at a time when the rise of AI and digital infrastructure is bringing the issue of their environmental footprint back into sharp focus. However, “this document does not cover issues related to other aspects of corporate social responsibility (CSR), such as social, cultural, diversity, inclusion or exclusion issues”, states the ISO.

Why this is useful for CSR departments: digital technology is becoming a key focus of environmental management. This standard provides a common language to better engage IT, product, procurement and innovation teams in a structured eco-design approach.

5) Carbon market: the EU wants to make its system more stable and predictable

On 1 April, the European Commission proposed a change to the EU ETS market stability reserve. The change is technical, but strategic: allowances held in the reserve more than 400 million would no longer be automatically cancelled, but retained as a reserve that can be drawn upon if the market tightens. By the end of 2024, 3.2 billion allowances had been cancelled, the Commission’s press release states.

The stated aim is to strengthen the stability and predictability of the European carbon market, against a backdrop of energy volatility and geopolitical tensions. The Commission also points out that, largely thanks to the ETS, the EU’s domestic emissions fell by 39% between 1990 and 2024, whilst the economy grew by 71%.

Why this matters: beyond climate targets, it is the architecture of the transition instruments that is at stake here. The EU is demonstrating its commitment to maintaining its ETS system.

Sources: ISO, actuEL HSE, ESG Today, AEF info, European Commission.