A study of reporting indicates that the proportion of companies with more robust net-zero targets fell from 46% in 2023 to 16% in 2025, reflecting a more complex global scenario.
How many Brazilian companies manage to publish, with real transparency, not only their achievements in... sustainability, But also, were their results below expectations? The answer, until recently, was uncomfortably low. But something is changing, and the numbers confirm it.
The evolution of corporate sustainability reports is clear. Initially, they were voluntary publications with a strong marketing appeal; later, they became more technically rigorous, and today these reports are considered strategic for corporate management: increasingly linked to indicators, goals, and performance.
When companies began taking their first steps in sustainability reporting, between the late 1990s and early 2000s, the concern was to demonstrate good intentions and modernity: reporting social, environmental, and governance information, in addition to financial statements, emerged as something innovative, something for companies connected to the spirit of the times.
The arrival of the first international standards, expressed in the indicators of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), a benchmark for sustainability reporting, marked a turning point towards a more technical and standardized approach. Over the last two decades, the agenda environmental, social and governance (ESG)This has evolved within companies, and the disclosure of information on these topics has undergone regulatory adjustments.
What we see today is a conscious effort towards more strategic reporting and greater integration with financial statements. Beyond their achievements and progress on the sustainability agenda, companies today seek to communicate the complexity of operating on a planet exposed to pressures such as the climate emergency and biodiversity loss. biodiversity, persistent social inequalities and deep geopolitical tensions.
The third edition of Reporting Matters Brazil, prepared by the Brazilian Business Council for Sustainable Development (CEBDS), presents data illustrating this trajectory. The study, based on the methodology of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and with technical support from Grupo Report, analyzed 82 Brazilian reports published in 2025 with data from 2024. A total of 9,986 pages were evaluated based on 16 criteria and 76 sub-criteria, providing a structured view of how Brazilian companies organize, prioritize, and communicate ESG information in an increasingly demanding regulatory and market environment.
The degree of adherence to standardization is noteworthy – 97% of the reports use the GRI methodology – and to the concept of dual materiality, adopted by 75%. In general terms, dual materiality explains how sustainability impacts the business, and how the business impacts the environment and society. It is an important indicator of maturity and transparency – because it obliges companies to look in both directions, and not just internally.
At the same time, the study highlights significant challenges on the transition agenda: the proportion of companies with more robust net zero targets fell from 46% in 2023 to 16% in 2025, and 35% still do not declare this commitment, reflecting a more complex and demanding global scenario. Added to this is the fact that only 32% of the reports undergo full auditing, indicating room for improvement in the reliability and depth of the information disclosed.
These data reveal that the technical advancements in reporting still face significant challenges regarding consistency and credibility. This is where transparency becomes central: it's about exposing the company's real strategy, its risks, its goals, and its results – including failures. Although a predominantly celebratory approach still exists, with few reports openly acknowledging results below expectations, a relevant evolution in companies' willingness to recognize their limitations is already observable. This movement is not rhetorical: it's a sign that companies are understanding that credibility is built on consistency, not on showcasing results.
One of the cases presented in the Reporting Matters Brazil study, from a company in the urban mobility sector, exemplifies this new approach. The report is honest in presenting a balance between the year's achievements and opportunities for improvement. In a sober and realistic tone, the company reports that, even with investments in infrastructure, it still faces operational bottlenecks and expansion challenges in some regions; it acknowledges the impacts of ongoing projects and the need for adaptation to ensure the quality of services provided. It also addresses the climate and social challenges of its concessions, which demand improvements in community engagement and operational efficiency. By demonstrating a commitment to mature and responsible communication, the company reinforces the credibility of its report.
The improved quality of reporting is also evident in the presentation of historical series, the analysis of impacts on the value chain, the explicit definition of goals, and the mention of areas for improvement. Reports are leaving superficiality behind and consistently aligning management, strategy, and transparency. This largely reflects the evolution of regulation. In Brazil, a milestone was Resolution 193 of the Securities and Exchange Commission (CVM), which incorporated the IFRS S1 and S2 standards of the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). This measure brought sustainability closer to accounting logic and demanded greater rigor in the disclosure of information related to ESG.
With the internalization of this agenda, companies are now better prepared to measure, organize, and integrate sustainability into the core of their businesses. It is necessary to move forward so that the report becomes increasingly a tool for guiding decisions within companies. It is true that today they are more connected to management and less restricted to institutional communication, but companies need to move towards making the reports management tools.
There is good news in this direction. New steps are being developed to support the evolution of companies in their reporting regarding the materiality of their actions and the impacts on their businesses. Examples include the CEBDS Corporate Sustainability Parameters, an initiative that supports the structuring of management on ESG issues, helping companies understand their level of maturity and identify paths for evolution. And the Nature Report, a partnership between CEBDS and Report, is another front that will help companies understand how to incorporate material biodiversity and nature issues into their disclosures, connecting them to risk and opportunity management in response to the demand from investors and key stakeholders, expressed in the Task Force on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD).
These initiatives, combined with what Reporting Matters Brazil already documents as a consolidated market benchmark, point to a concrete direction for companies: using their own indicators not only to be accountable, but to make better decisions. The most valuable sustainability report is not the most beautiful or the most voluminous – it is the one that feeds strategic planning, informs resource allocation, and anticipates risks before they materialize. In a world where the risks associated with the collapse of ecosystems already affect production chains, access to capital, and the very viability of businesses, the companies that can transform transparency into a decision-making criterion, and the report into a real management tool, will come out ahead.
