With the entry into force of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) marks the beginning of a new era in corporate reporting. From the 2024 financial year, numerous companies in the EU will have to disclose in detail how they fulfill their environmental and social responsibilities – and do so in accordance with clearly defined standards: the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). But what is actually reported? Which sustainability topics will companies be focusing on in 2024? And which aspects are (still) under the radar?
Part 2 of the Inside CSRD series: Sustainability topics 2024
The first published CSRD reports 2024 provide exciting insights. Based on more than 200 analyzed reports and studies by EY, Deloitte & DRSC, PwC(webcast), Horváth, KPMG, KEY ESG, European Issuers and others, clear patterns emerge:
Some sustainability topics in 2024, such as climate change or working conditions, dominate almost every report.
Others – such as biodiversity, supply chain risks or consumer concerns – are dealt with much less frequently.
In this article, we take a closer look at this shift in priorities:
What does it say about the current implementation of the CSRD – and what does it mean for companies starting out now?
Spoiler: Those who only focus on climate protection underestimate the diversity of CSRD.
1. climate change, workforce & governance: the ESG core of sustainability issues in 2024
The analysis of the first CSRD reports 2024 shows a clear picture: three sustainability topics are at the top of the list for almost all companies – regardless of sector, size or country. They form the de facto standard of the new reporting obligation.
E1 - Climate change: the universal topic
Almost 100 % of the companies analyzed classify climate change (ESRS E1) as material.
Reports on:
Climate risks & opportunities
Net zero targets (approx. 75% have formulated one)
Transition plans for decarbonization
The data situation is already established in many companies, ESG ratings and investors assume that E1 is a must. The climate report is increasingly becoming a strategic indicator.
S1 - Own labor force: Social standard with database
ESRS S1 is also one of the most considered sustainability topics in 2024. Almost all companies report on:
Diversity & equality
Working conditions & occupational safety
Further training, fluctuation & retention
Why? Because most of the data is available internally – and social aspects are increasingly under the scrutiny of the public, the supervisory board and talents.
G1 - Corporate behavior: Governance is part of it
G1 (Business Conduct) is also reported almost across the board:
Anti-corruption & bribery
Whistleblowing systems
Values, ethics & codes of conduct
Governance is not new – but it is now an explicitly integrated part of ESG disclosure in the CSRD.
Focus on established topics
These three topics – climate change, own workforce and ethical corporate behavior – are the clear focus of the first CSRD reports. They mark the ESG core of the 2024 sustainability topics that many companies are initially concentrating on. There are understandable reasons for this:
Clear regulation: There are detailed requirements for these topics in the ESRS. Particularly in the area of climate reporting (E1), the requirements are already well anchored in the EU Taxonomy, GHG Protocol and TCFD.
Stakeholder relevance: Investors, customers, employees and NGOs primarily demand transparency on climate and social issues. Companies know this: Anyone who does not report here will be criticized.
Availability of data: For S1 and G1, many organizations already have personnel data or governance reports that have been collected over many years. Climate data (Scope 1 & 2) is also usually readily available.
This focus on established topics is an obvious starting point – especially in the first reporting year. Nevertheless, it is already clear: The CSRD requires more than just the minimum ESG standard.
It requires a holistic view of all significant effects – even where companies have less experience, less data availability or more complex interrelationships. This is precisely where many reports still show clear gaps – and we will take a closer look at this in the next chapter.
2. biodiversity, consumers, supply chains: The neglected sustainability issues of 2024
While the majority of the first CSRD reports focus on climate change, employees and governance, other sustainability topics often remain in the background in 2024 – even though they would be relevant in many business models.
Biodiversity (E4): Complex and often ignored
Biodiversity is considered one of the greatest levers – and risks – for long-term sustainability. Nevertheless, according to studies by Horváth and Deloitte, only around 30-50% of companies classify biodiversity as essential.
This is often due to:
unclear effects on the company’s own business model,
lack of KPIs and measurement systems,
or the phase-in rule, which allows a voluntary omission in the first year.
Biodiversity does not only affect agriculture, energy or chemicals – industries with global supply chains or land consumption are also indirectly affected. Many companies still underestimate their role in ecosystems.
S3 & S4: Communities and consumers barely visible
Affected communities (S3) and consumer concerns (S4) hardly play a role in many reports.
B2B companies in particular often do not see any direct relevance here – although infrastructure projects, product responsibility or social impacts would certainly exist in many cases.
What is often missing:
Systematic evaluation of social effects,
dialog-based stakeholder involvement,
standardized indicators (e.g. consumer satisfaction, access to services, complaint mechanisms).
Supply chains (S2): Recognized as relevant - but hardly documented
Although the supply chain is often identified as a material issue, actual reporting is often incomplete. The reason for this is usually the limited availability of data – especially for indirect suppliers at lower levels. In addition, many companies are still in the process of setting up their supply chain reporting in technical and organizational terms.
The result: obligation recognized, implementation postponed – supported by phase-in facilitations from the ESRS.
Omitted - but not irrelevant
Many of the sustainability topics in 2024 that (still) barely appear in the reports are not irrelevant per se – they are just much more difficult to record, quantify or allocate. The CSRD provides time here, but no excuse. Those who already go beyond the mandatory topics are positioning themselves strategically – and effectively in terms of reputation.
3. why this imbalance arises - and what it causes
The analysis of the first CSRD reports clearly shows that companies set priorities. But why do certain sustainability topics reliably end up in the report – while others are systematically omitted?
Causes: What (still) speaks against broader topic coverage
There are many reasons for this thematic imbalance, but they are understandable:
Data availability: While climate data, key personnel figures or codes of conduct are generally available, there is often a lack of reliable, standardized information for biodiversity, S3/S4 or supply chains.
Complexity: Many of these topics are difficult to operationalize. What is a relevant impact on an ecosystem? How do I quantify social impacts along global supply chains?
Lack of established KPIs: There is a lack of recognized and widely used key figures that enable a consistent comparison or a structured review.
Phase-in rules: The ESRS allow delayed entry for certain disclosures – which many companies (legitimately) take advantage of.
Strategic restraint: Some companies deliberately wait to see what stakeholders actually demand – and initially rely on solid basic reporting on expected core topics.
Effect: Why less is not always more
What initially seems like a pragmatic limitation has direct consequences:
Stakeholder perception: Topics that are not reported are often perceived as “not relevant” – even if they actually are.
Comparability: If companies classify very different issues as material, benchmarking becomes more difficult – especially for investors and ESG rating agencies.
Reputational risks: If a relevant topic is omitted (e.g. biodiversity at a chemical company), this can quickly be interpreted as a gap or deliberate omission.
Missed opportunity for differentiation: Those who address more complex or “hidden” sustainability issues at an early stage can stand out positively – especially compared to companies that limit themselves to the minimum.
Reporting is positioning
The sustainability issues of 2024 not only reflect regulatory obligations, but also strategic decisions. What companies report – and what they don’t – shapes their perception on the market. The CSRD opens up the space for holistic transparency. Companies that actively shape this space gain trust. Those who use it defensively risk falling behind.
Conclusion: Those who only report on climate remain one-dimensional when it comes to sustainability
The evaluation of the first CSRD reports shows that companies are setting clear priorities in their choice of topics – and often rightly so. Climate change, working conditions and corporate governance form a reliable ESG core on which many organizations initially focus. These topics are defined in regulatory terms, strategically relevant and easily measurable in operational terms – they offer certainty in reporting and guidance for stakeholders.
But sustainability does not end with the climate. The CSRD requires holistic reporting on all material impacts – and this also includes complex, indirect or less tangible issues such as biodiversity, social responsibility along the supply chain or consumer protection.
Many of these sustainability issues in 2024 are still being addressed cautiously or not at all. This may be understandable from a data and resource planning perspective – but it remains a missed opportunity. After all, those who go beyond the mandatory program today and also make uncomfortable or difficult topics visible are positioning themselves as credible, forward-looking and strategically mature.
CSRD is not climate reporting with an appendix – but a reflection of overall sustainability performance. Companies that take this seriously not only report more comprehensively, but also more convincingly.
