I’m nearing submission of our academic paper—thanks to robust collaboration with my co-authors—and the core argument coming into focus is clear:
While legislative ESG frameworks like the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) offer transparency, I have now audited 1000’s of pages of company’s sustainability statements. They often fall short in driven meaningful, aligned corporate behaviour related to Climate Change mitigation . In contrast, third-party accreditation programs—such as Bord Bia’s Origin Green—demonstrate a more actionable, resilient model for assessing and encouraging sustainability.
The CSRD has undoubtedly elevated transparency. It mandates standardized, audited, and comparable ESG reporting, grounded in the principle of double materiality—requiring firms to report both on how sustainability issues affect them and how they impact the world
Risk of Greenwashing and Selective Reporting: Despite mandates, firms may selectively present data to enhance their image—a problem compounded by flexibility in metrics, variations in intreprating standards, and narrative discretion
In short: CSRD helps shine a spotlight—but the light doesn’t always translate into change.