What 656 reports reveal about corporate sustainability
- Arvis Zeile
- Aug 15
- 3 min read
EFRAG's State of Play 2025 report landed in July, 2025, and the numbers tell a fascinating story about how companies are approaching mandatory sustainability reporting.
The 115-Page Average (And Other Surprises)
First, let's talk size. The average sustainability report clocks in at 115 pages. But here's where it gets interesting: French companies are writing novels at 135 pages while Nordic companies keep it tight at 85. One ambitious soul submitted 440 pages. Another managed just 25.
Why the difference? Turns out Southern European companies mirror their financial reporting style—if their annual reports are lengthy, so are their sustainability statements. Northern Europeans? They prefer brevity across the board.
The Universal Three
Almost every company reports on the same trio:
Own workforce: 99%
Climate change: 98%
Business conduct: 93%
Makes sense—these are the areas where companies already have data, systems, and expertise. But then things get interesting.
The 30% Club
Here's what only 30% of companies bother to mention:
Water resources
Biodiversity
Affected communities
In 2025, while water scarcity affects 2 billion people globally, 70% of companies don't even mention it in their sustainability reports. The biodiversity crisis? Same story.
The Transition Plan Paradox
Now for the head-scratcher: 98% say climate change is material to their business. But only 55% have an actual transition plan.
Of those who do have plans:
70% align with 1.5°C targets (encouraging!)
But 40% conveniently forget about Scope 3 emissions
Most lack specific funding details or clear decarbonization pathways
It's like planning a road trip by only deciding on the destination.
Who Companies Actually Talk To
When conducting materiality assessments, companies stick to their comfort zone:
Internal employees: 97%
Customers: 70%
Suppliers: 65%
Meanwhile:
NGOs: 33%
Communities: 30%
Academia: 14%
Trade unions: 11%
The irony? The stakeholders least consulted often have the most transformative insights.
Financial vs. Non-Financial: Two Different Worlds
Financial institutions live in their own reporting universe:
Average report length: 140 pages
Average material topics: 5
Math check: That's 28 pages per topic
Non-financial companies:
Average report length: 110 pages
Average material topics: 6
Much more varied in their approach
The Geographic Divide
Location matters more than sector:
Netherlands: 73% have transition plans
Sweden: 69%
Some countries: Under 40%
Ambitious national climate targets seem to drive corporate ambition. Who would have thought?
What's Actually Happening Here?
These patterns reveal companies navigating uncharted territory. They're building the plane while flying it, focusing on what they know (workforce, climate) while struggling with emerging areas (nature, water, communities).
The 30% reporting entity-specific metrics shows some pioneers are already going beyond compliance, creating their own indicators relevant to their unique business models.
The variance isn't failure—it's experimentation. Some companies write encyclopaedias, others write executive summaries. Some engage everyone, others stick to the usual suspects. Some have detailed transition plans, others are still figuring out what transition means.
The Bottom Line
Year one of CSRD has produced lots of different interpretations of sustainability reporting. That's not chaos—that's evolution in action.
Those missing community voices? They're not just stakeholder management fails. They're untapped sources of innovation and social license to operate.
In our opinioin the question isn't who's doing it right or wrong. It's who's going to move fastest from compliance to competitive advantage. Because while everyone's still figuring out how to fill 115 pages, someone's going to realise that the real game is what happens after you hit submit.
*Data source: EFRAG State of Play 2025 Report - Implementation of the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (July 2025)
