Sustainability ambitions are soaring, but the numbers behind them are still wobbling. As organisations race to set bold targets, the reliability and readiness of their data is left struggling to keep up. This blog tackles the widening gap between aspiration and evidence, exploring the urgent need for robust sustainability data, and answering what it truly takes to close it.
The boldness of corporate sustainability commitments over the past several years has been striking. Net zero targets, nature pledges, social impact frameworks – organisations across the market have set ambitions that signal genuine intent. What has not always kept pace is the data needed to back them up.
Sustainability ambition is accelerating faster than the underlying data foundations required to support it. Many organisations still collect Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) information through spreadsheets and siloed processes, rely heavily on proxy figures for Scope 3 emissions and lack the cross-functional governance needed to produce information that is accurate, timely and decision-useful. When ambition outpaces data maturity, reporting becomes vulnerable – to scrutiny, to assurance challenges and to the credibility gap that opens when disclosures cannot be defended under pressure.
Sustainability data readiness is one of five structural shifts redefining corporate reporting in 2026 – a year in which the UK Sustainability Reporting Standards are finalising, board-level control declarations are extending to non-financial reporting, and investors are applying greater rigour to the sustainability information they rely on. This article sets out what it takes to close that gap in practice.
To explore all five structural shifts shaping corporate reporting in 2026, visit our From Renaissance to Readiness hub.
The problem: sustainability data has not kept pace with ambition
By data fragility we mean the vulnerability and limitations in both collecting sustainability data and ensuring it is the right data – accurate, complete, timely and relevant enough to support meaningful decisions. Ambitious on sustainability, but data fragile: organisations set far-reaching goals, such as net zero by 2050, yet often lack the underlying information needed to understand the risks, costs, pathways and trade-offs involved in reaching them. Without robust data on emissions sources, supply chain impacts, technology costs or operational dependencies, these ambitions rest on shaky ground.
Proxy data remains common, particularly for Scope 3 emissions, which typically dominate the footprint. While proxies provide a starting point, they lack the precision needed for confident decision-making. Primary data from suppliers is essential, yet building the necessary collaboration takes time and effort.
Small sustainability teams compound the difficulty. Resource constraints and consolidation driven by economic pressures have left many teams stretched thin. Sustainability data is frequently viewed as separate from the rest of the business, even though Scopes 1, 2 and 3 touch every function, from operations and procurement to commercial. Without cross-functional co-ordination, coverage remains patchy.
Ambition without foundations is fragile. Regulatory uncertainty has contributed to inconsistent collection practices, but the deeper issue lies in the tension between external commitments and internal capabilities. The result is not merely fragile data, but often too little of the right data to inform strategy or measure genuine progress.
Why this matters now: investor expectations and the 2026 regulatory direction
Investors continue to seek transparent, assured and decision-useful sustainability information. In a landscape of geopolitical fragmentation and economic pressures, stakeholders want evidence of resilience and responsible governance. High-quality data supports better capital allocation, risk management and sustained value creation.
The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) provides useful lessons. Omnibus I simplifications, effective largely from 2027, narrow the scope and reduce data points, offering relief for many companies in scope. However, with around 90% fewer companies now required to disclose against the standards, this change may also lead to greater variation in data collection practices and maturity levels across the market. For those organisations still reporting in 2026, the emphasis remains on integrated systems capable of handling value chain information and preparing for assurance.
The UK Sustainability Reporting Standards (UK SRS) have now landed. Final standards, closely aligned with IFRS S1 and S2, were published in February 2026 and are available for voluntary use immediately. Mandatory application for listed companies is proposed from 1 January 2027, subject to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) finalising its rules later this year. From that point, companies will need to tell a clearer, more connected story of value creation across the annual report. The framework is more prescriptive and investor-focused than the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), requiring specific, credible disclosures on governance, transition plans, financial impacts, scenario analysis and Scope 3. Draft SRS S2 sets higher expectations for quantifying impacts, explaining assumptions behind targets and assessing resilience through transparent scenario analysis.
The 2024 UK Corporate Governance Code adds further weight. From periods starting 1 January 2026, boards must declare the effectiveness of material controls, including those over non-financial reporting. Early indicators suggest many companies have work to do on oversight, assurance mapping and control conclusions.
These converging requirements make 2026 the moment to strengthen foundations. Early preparation – clearer governance, upgraded data systems, robust Scope 3 processes and assurance readiness – will determine how smoothly organisations adapt.
The key is not to collect more data, but to collect the right data. Determine which sustainability areas are most relevant to the business – its risks, opportunities and long-term success. Materiality rationalises effort, preventing overload and directing resources towards information that truly drives performance.
Define clear roles and cross-functional governance to break down silos. Digitise processes for accuracy and auditability, replacing proxies with primary data through supplier collaboration where possible. Leverage AI for real-time insights, but apply strong controls to ensure reliability.
Train teams consistently, retain evidence of judgements and assumptions and prepare for assurance. Establish baselines, set measurable targets and monitor progress against them – turning sustainability reporting from a compliance burden into a source of strategic insight.
Conclusion: data readiness as a strategic enabler
2026 is the year to close the gap between ambition and execution. Regulatory developments provide direction, but market expectations and governance requirements demand action. Data readiness is not a reporting exercise; it is a strategic enabler that builds trust, reduces risk and positions organisations for long-term success.
If your organisation is preparing for UK SRS, strengthening controls ahead of the 2026 declaration or seeking to focus sustainability data on what truly matters, get in touch with Ever Sustainable. We help companies rationalise data collection, build robust foundations and turn materiality into measurable progress. Contact us today to discuss how we can support your transition to readiness.