.png){kind=small}
We analysed the 2025 reports of 100 large EU companies disclosing sustainability information under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) to assess how companies are addressing critical sustainability challenges in their strategy.
The research evaluated what companies are telling us on climate, double materiality assessment, due diligence, actions and metrics, and governance. After the Omnibus I package narrowed the scope of the CSRD and simplified the standards, the quality of reports now depends more than ever on what companies themselves judge to be material.
The CSRD works as a transparency tool. Users can now distinguish frontrunners from laggards and discern generic claims from actual evidence. However, our research also reveals a very uneven picture when it comes to how companies report on more complex sustainability challenges, as well as a concerning lack of integration in companies’ strategies. Among our key findings:
Our research shows that the CSRD delivers where the standards are clear. Where they require clear metrics and details on ambition and strategy, as with climate transition plans, disclosures are more transparent and useful. Investors, civil society and business partners can distinguish claims from evidence, and frontrunners from laggards, which is vital for sustainable finance. But the same data shows hesitation in the transition, and that is a warning sign for EU competitiveness.
The sustainability transition is also an industrial and innovation challenge. A corporate sector that is not ready for clean industrial policy, green procurement and sustainable finance is a structural risk to EU competitiveness. Uncertainty in transition planning is a warning sign that the CSRD data helps to expose.
Our report goes beyond the findings. It sets out specific conclusions and practical recommendations for companies on how to develop strong reporting practices from climate transition plans and climate risk assessments to double materiality, due diligence and value chain reporting. It also offers directions for public authorities and EU policymakers on how to address the gaps we identified, from assurance and supervision to sector-specific guidance and the wider sustainable finance and industrial policy framework.
Explore the research
Prague Municipal Court ruled today in favour better protection of human health from air pollution in the capital of the Czech Republic. The Court revoked most of Prague's Air Quality Management Plan, issued in 2016 by the Czech Ministry of Environment.
Czech Supreme Administrative Court ruled yesterday in favour of air quality and protection of human health. In the case local citizens and an NGO from Ostrava agglomeration, the most polluted region in the Czech Republic, succeeded with their claim for better air quality.
Yesterday, on 5 November 2018, a lawsuit against the Ministry of the Environment (MoE) on liability for health damages and death of her husband from lung cancer was filed with the District Court in Prague 10. The plaintiff seeks damages for lung cancer, which she has managed to cure, but her husband has succumbed to the illness in October. The cause of the disease is seen in the long-term excessive concentration of air pollutants at their place of residence in Ostrava-Radvanice and in the fact that the MoE failed to provide effective measures to decrease the pollution to legal limit values.
