How well are corporate sustainability goals designed? A global assessment of corporate commitments to water, ecosystems, climate, and materials and waste management

Amid rising global challenges, corporate sustainability commitments are under increasing scrutiny. This study offers a data-driven analysis of how companies develop sustainability goals and how these align with seven transformative criteria. We used a global dataset of 818 goals from 534 companies, evaluated through the Embedding Project’s third-party Sustainability Goal Assessment framework, to assess the prevalence and quality of commitments. We compared how frequently aspects like system resilience, strategic impact or commitment transparency were included in commitments across different company types and geographically. Climate-related goals were most common and tended to receive higher scores for quality, mainly due to alignment with established reporting frameworks, but often fell short on systemic change, transparency, and implementation clarity. Ecosystem and water-related goals, though less frequent, were more likely to aim for strategic impacts and systemic change reflecting the role of multi-stakeholder coordination and strategic alignment. Commitments were scored as higher quality on average in the communication service sector compared to industrials, information technology and consumer discretionary sectors and in cases of private ownership structures. Relational network analysis revealed dependencies among criteria, highlighting that transparency’s plays a central role in goal quality and the importance of actionable plans. Our findings suggest that achieving improvements in the quality of sustainability commitments requires corporate stakeholders to define measurable, time-bound sustainability goals, which extend accountability across the value chain, and integrate transparent reporting, and have incentives for systemic change. Policymakers can support this by standardizing terminology, creating fiscal incentives, and ensuring stable, long-term regulations that mandate transparency and full life cycle accountability.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
Published
2025-12-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pstr.0000215
Primary Topic
Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How well are corporate sustainability goals designed? A global assessment of corporate commitments to water, ecosystems, climate, and materials and waste management

Sebastian Theis, Emmy Wassénius, Flavio Affinito, Isobel Hawkins et al.
PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
article

How well are corporate sustainability goals designed? A global assessment of corporate commitments to water, ecosystems, climate, and materials and waste management

Sebastian Theis, Emmy Wassénius, Flavio Affinito, Isobel Hawkins, Martine Maron, Peter S. Rodriguez, Jonathan L. W. Ruppert, Marie-Josée Fortin, Andrew Gonzalez
article en

Abstract

Amid rising global challenges, corporate sustainability commitments are under increasing scrutiny. This study offers a data-driven analysis of how companies develop sustainability goals and how these align with seven transformative criteria. We used a global dataset of 818 goals from 534 companies, evaluated through the Embedding Project’s third-party Sustainability Goal Assessment framework, to assess the prevalence and quality of commitments. We compared how frequently aspects like system resilience, strategic impact or commitment transparency were included in commitments across different company types and geographically. Climate-related goals were most common and tended to receive higher scores for quality, mainly due to alignment with established reporting frameworks, but often fell short on systemic change, transparency, and implementation clarity. Ecosystem and water-related goals, though less frequent, were more likely to aim for strategic impacts and systemic change reflecting the role of multi-stakeholder coordination and strategic alignment. Commitments were scored as higher quality on average in the communication service sector compared to industrials, information technology and consumer discretionary sectors and in cases of private ownership structures. Relational network analysis revealed dependencies among criteria, highlighting that transparency’s plays a central role in goal quality and the importance of actionable plans. Our findings suggest that achieving improvements in the quality of sustainability commitments requires corporate stakeholders to define measurable, time-bound sustainability goals, which extend accountability across the value chain, and integrate transparent reporting, and have incentives for systemic change. Policymakers can support this by standardizing terminology, creating fiscal incentives, and ensuring stable, long-term regulations that mandate transparency and full life cycle accountability.

PLOS Sustainability and TransformationVol. 4(12)
Responsible consumption and production
Openalex Percentile: Top 37%
Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.