News & Updates
Where We Are, Where We Are Going, and Who Carries It: The 2026 SDG Report, COP31, and the Tools to Deliver
29/06/2026
A 169to1® analysis for the road to Antalya. This summary draws on the United Nations Sustainable Development Report 2026, whose opening section, “From Goals to Means: The Path to SDG Implementation,” was led by Professor Jeffrey D. Sachs and the SDSN SDG Transformation Center team.
Three things, one line of progress
To understand the moment we are in, it helps to hold three things together, because they are not separate stories. They are one story told in sequence.
The Sustainable Development Report 2026 tells us where we are now, and it does so by measuring how far we have come since 2015. It is the record of the journey and the snapshot of the present.
COP31 is the vehicle that carries everyone forward from that snapshot toward 2030 and beyond. It is where the diagnosis becomes negotiation, and where the next stage of the journey is set.
169to1® is where the journey is actually walked, by the four groups who turn global commitments into local action: educators, small businesses, NGO teams, and youth movements.
Read together, the line runs clean. The report says what the problem now is. COP31 decides how to act on it. 169to1® equips the people who have to deliver it. The rest of this analysis follows that line.
Where we are now: the report, and the progress behind it
The eleventh Sustainable Development Report, published this June, lands with a clear verdict. A decade after the Goals were adopted, the world is significantly off pace, and the central problem has shifted. The targets are known, the data is richer than ever, and the diagnosis is no longer in doubt. What is missing is delivery. The report frames the entire challenge ahead as a move “from goals to means”, from setting ambitions to building the financing, governance, and data systems that turn them into outcomes on the ground.
The value of the report is that it shows movement, not just a single year. Since 2016 it has tracked every UN Member State on the same measures, so this year's picture sits on a decade of comparable data. East and South Asia have made more progress than any other region since 2015, with China climbing fourteen places and India eighteen. Finland, Sweden, and Denmark top the SDG Index again, yet even the highest performers face serious gaps. The United States has slipped five positions. This year the Index ranks 169 countries across 123 indicators, with Eritrea and Timor-Leste assessed for the first time.
Two additions give the 2026 edition its distinctive shape. The first is a new Index of Countries' Support for UN-Based Multilateralism, on which Barbados ranks first and the United States ranks last. The second is a pair of surveys, one of SDSN's expert networks and one of more than a thousand people across 127 countries, asking what is actually blocking progress. The answer was consistent. People want the SDG framework to continue beyond 2030, and they want it backed by stronger implementation: adequate financing, credible governance at every level, and better use of science and data.
This is the strategic backdrop. Formal UN discussions on a post-2030 agenda begin in 2027, alongside a transition to a new Secretary-General. The report is the baseline everyone will argue from. The next eighteen months decide what is built on it.
Where we are going: COP31 as the vehicle to 2030 and beyond
COP31 convenes in Antalya, Türkiye, from 9 to 20 November 2026 at the Antalya Expo Center, with Türkiye holding the Presidency and Australia leading the negotiations. A World Leaders' Summit falls on 11 and 12 November, and a Pre-COP in the Pacific, hosted in Fiji with a leaders' component in Tuvalu, will carry the concerns of small island states into the room before the main session opens.
COP31 is being called an implementation COP, and that is precisely where the report stops being a document and starts being a tool. Belém set the financing architecture: a goal to mobilise 1.3 trillion US dollars a year by 2035, a commitment to triple adaptation finance, and a loss and damage fund moving into operation. Antalya now has to show that money and policy translate into measurable national action, with the next round of Nationally Determined Contributions under scrutiny against a 1.5 degree pathway that requires emissions to fall roughly 43 percent by 2030. The report's central message and the conference's central task are the same task, described in two languages. This is the forward motion: from a measured present, through a negotiated agreement, toward 2030 and the framework that follows it.
How representatives should use the report at COP31
The Sustainable Development Report is not a climate report, and that is its value in a climate negotiation. It treats climate action as inseparable from financing, development, and governance, which is exactly the integration delegates need to argue for. Six practical uses stand out.
Benchmark national positions in shared data. The SDG Index and dashboards give every delegation a defensible, internationally comparable baseline. Representatives can ground their statements in where their country actually stands, identify the targets pulling them off track, and hold counterparts to the same evidence rather than to rhetoric.
Make the financing case structurally, not as a plea. The report's emphasis on implementation means and reform of the global financial architecture supports pressure to deliver the 1.3 trillion dollar goal and to reform multilateral development banks. The argument moves from asking for money to fixing the plumbing that moves it.
Use the spillover evidence as leverage. The report's spillover analysis shows how high-income economies generate a large share of their environmental footprint abroad through trade and imported emissions. For Pacific, African, and small-island delegations, this turns a moral appeal into a quantified accountability claim, and it connects directly to the agenda the Pacific Pre-COP will carry into Antalya.
Anchor NDCs 3.0 in science and indicators. The implementation focus matches COP31's mandate to convert pledges into verifiable policy. Delegates can tie revised contributions to the report's indicators so that ambition is expressed in tracked outcomes rather than headline figures.
Defend the multilateral system itself. The new multilateralism index arrives in a year of visible fragmentation. Representatives who want climate action to stay inside a coordinated UN framework now have a measured way to show which countries are holding that system up and which are pulling away.
Connect Antalya to the post-2030 question. COP31 does not stand alone. It feeds the 2027 discussions on what follows the 2030 Agenda. Delegates who link climate implementation to the wider SDG implementation agenda will shape the framework, not just react to it.
Who carries it: 169to1® and the four groups who deliver
A report measures, and a conference negotiates, but neither delivers. Delivery happens further down, in classrooms, small firms, civil-society teams, and youth campaigns. The 169to1® Official SDG Toolkit Collection was built for that final stretch, with material rewritten around the 169 official targets for the four groups who carry the work locally. Here is what each can do as COP31 opens.
Education. The Education and Schools packs, including alignment for IB and CIS settings, turn this year's findings into curriculum-ready material. A teacher can take the report's headline results and the “from goals to means” framing into a single lesson, use SDG 13 as the reference unit, and have students follow COP31 live rather than studying it years later. Assessment guides turn that understanding into evidence a school can show.
SME Business. The SME Core Pack gives smaller firms a practical route into SDG and ESG alignment without enterprise-scale overhead. As the report's spillover findings and COP31's financing decisions raise expectations along supply chains, an SME can use the pack to map its own position against the targets and prepare for the procurement, reporting, and capital shifts that follow Antalya, before those expectations arrive as a demand.
NGO Teams. The NGO Complete Pack supports civil-society organisations in doing exactly what the report calls for: stronger governance, partnerships built on mutual accountability rather than donor-recipient dynamics, and monitoring that measures long-term impact rather than inputs. An NGO team can use it to build a partnership or accountability case and bring structure to its engagement with the COP31 Action Agenda and the Blue and Green Zones.
Youth Movements. The Youth Ambassadors Action toolkit moves young people from slogans to systems, with leadership and project structures built on the 169 targets. With a Youth Champion role embedded in the COP31 leadership model and youth voices central to the Pacific Pre-COP, a young leader can use the toolkit to design a real project, not a poster, and step into the moment they prepared for.
The line, in one breath
The Sustainable Development Report 2026 shows us where we stand and how far we have travelled. COP31 in Antalya is the vehicle that carries that knowledge forward to 2030 and beyond. 169to1® puts the tools in the hands of the educators, businesses, NGO teams, and young people who turn the agreement into action. Three things, one line of progress, and a clear place for everyone to step onto it.
Sources: UN Sustainable Development Report 2026 (SDSN, SDG Transformation Center); UNFCCC COP31 information; UN in Türkiye COP30 outcomes summary. Conference logistics are accurate as of June 2026 per UNFCCC materials and may be updated closer to November. This is an independent 169to1® / Hudson Consultancy Online analysis informed by these sources and is not authored by, or endorsed by, Professor Jeffrey D. Sachs or the SDSN.
The 2026 SDG Scorecard: What the Sustainable Development Report Says, and Why It Matters to You
25/06/2026
A 169to1® in-depth analysis of the United Nations Sustainable Development Report 2026, published on 23 June 2026 by the SDSN SDG Transformation Center. Lead authors: Jeffrey D. Sachs, Guillaume Lafortune, Grayson Fuller, and Guilherme Iablonovski.
What this report actually is
Every year since 2016, a team of researchers has produced the closest thing the world has to a report card for the Sustainable Development Goals. The Goals are the seventeen promises that all 193 UN member states made in 2015: to end poverty and hunger, deliver health and education, provide clean water and energy, protect the climate and nature, and build fairer, more peaceful societies, all by 2030.
The report measures how each country is doing using something called the SDG Index. Think of it as a score out of 100, where 100 means a country has fully achieved the Goals. It is built from 123 different indicators, covering 169 countries this year, with Eritrea and Timor-Leste assessed for the first time. Because the same method has been used for a decade, the report does not just show a single moment. It shows the direction of travel.
This is the eleventh edition, and its subtitle sets the tone for everything inside it: Implementing Sustainable Development: 2030 and Beyond. The message is that the world has spent ten years agreeing on what to do, and the time for agreeing is over.
The bottom line, stated plainly
Here is the sentence that matters most. With four years left on the clock, only about 16 percent of the targets are on track to be met by 2030. The large majority will be missed at the current pace.
That is the stake in its simplest form. The promises made in 2015 are, for the most part, not being kept on time. And yet the report's second finding is just as important: almost every country still wants the framework to continue. The world has not given up on the Goals. It has fallen behind on delivering them. The whole report is an attempt to explain that gap and to say what would close it.
To make sense of it, the report organises everything around five key messages. Each one carries a real-world consequence, so we will take them in turn.
Message one: the world still believes in the plan
The first finding is reassuring. Commitment to the Goals remains strong almost everywhere. In 2025, when the UN General Assembly voted on resolutions referring to sustainable development, support regularly passed 170 of the 193 member states. A total of 190 countries have now formally reviewed their own progress through the UN's voluntary review process, and a growing number of cities and regions are doing the same at the local level.
What is at stake: this is the foundation everything else rests on. The Goals are not fading away or being quietly abandoned. The plan you may have heard about years ago is still the active, agreed plan of nearly the entire world. That shared commitment is what makes coordinated action possible at all.
Message two: Asia is pulling ahead, and the balance is shifting
The countries making the fastest progress are in East and South Asia. They have improved more than any other region since 2015. Among the major powers, China has climbed fourteen places in the rankings and India eighteen. Russia's position is roughly unchanged. The United States has slipped five places.
At the very top of the table sit Finland, Sweden, and Denmark, the same Nordic countries that have led for years. Even they, the report is careful to note, still fall short on several Goals, particularly around climate and consumption.
What is at stake: progress is real and it is possible, which is the hopeful part. But the centre of gravity in sustainable development is moving. The countries that treat the Goals as a serious national plan are gaining ground, and those that step back are falling behind. This is not only a moral scorecard. It increasingly tracks where economic momentum and global influence are heading.
Message three: the cooperation that holds it all together is under strain
The 2026 report introduces a new measure called the Index of Countries' Support for UN-Based Multilateralism. In plain terms, it asks how much each country actually backs the shared international system, the one that negotiates climate deals, coordinates health responses, and sets common rules.
Barbados, a small island nation, ranks first. The United States ranks last and is described as a statistical outlier, meaning it sits far outside the normal range. The report notes that the US federal government openly declared its opposition to the Goals and the 2030 Agenda, withdrew from more than sixty international organisations in January 2026, and in 2025 voted with the international majority in only about 5 percent of recorded UN votes.
What is at stake: global goals depend on countries choosing to work together. When one of the most powerful nations steps out of the shared system, it strains the cooperation that everything else relies on, from climate finance to disease control to trade rules. For the rest of the world, the question becomes whether the system can hold, and deliver, without full participation from every major power.
Message four: ten years of experience, distilled into eight priorities
This is the heart of the report, and the part led directly by Jeffrey Sachs. After a decade of trying, the authors set out eight priorities for what must change to accelerate progress. In everyday language, they are:
End the wars and spend the savings on people. Redirect money from conflict and military budgets toward peace, health, and human development.
Set a real timeline. Replace vague ambition with a concrete, dated plan for getting the work done.
Organise around six big transformations. Focus effort on six areas that drive everything else: education and skills, health, clean energy, sustainable food and land use, livable cities, and the digital shift.
Make long-term investment plans. Fund those transformations with steady, long-range financing rather than short-term, stop-start spending.
Strengthen cooperation closer to the ground. Build investment and collaboration at the continental, regional, and local levels, not only the global one.
Introduce new global taxes for shared needs. Raise dedicated funding for the things that benefit everyone, such as a stable climate, that no single country pays for alone.
Write the rules for new technology. Create global governance for artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and other fast-moving fields before they outpace oversight.
Bring the UN closer to the world it serves. Establish new UN campuses in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
What is at stake: this is the to-do list. It is the difference between a report that only complains and one that offers a route forward. Whether these priorities get taken up, especially the financing ones, largely determines whether the next phase succeeds or repeats the last decade's shortfall.
Message five: the real problem is doing, not deciding
To test its conclusions, the report ran two new surveys: one of expert networks across 64 countries plus the European Union, and a public survey of more than a thousand people across 127 countries. The findings were strikingly consistent. People want the framework to continue beyond 2030, and they believe the missing ingredient is implementation. They named three things above all: enough money, capable government at every level, and better use of science and data.
What is at stake: this confirms the report's central argument and the reason for its subtitle. The world does not lack goals, awareness, or even public support. It lacks the means to deliver, the financing, the institutions, and the evidence to act well. That is the gap that now decides everything.
So what is really at stake, in human terms
It is easy to read percentages and rankings and feel removed from them. Here is what they translate to.
Missing the Goals is not an abstract scoring failure. It means children who stay out of school, families who stay in poverty, illnesses that go untreated, and climate damage that arrives sooner and hits harder. The 16 percent figure is, underneath, a measure of human lives that the original promise was meant to improve and, on current trends, will not reach in time.
The report also points to a clear deadline beyond 2030. The UN will hold an SDG Summit in September 2027, and formal talks on what comes after the 2030 Agenda begin that year, alongside a change of UN Secretary-General. In other words, the next eighteen months set the terms for the framework that will guide the world toward mid-century. This report is the evidence base everyone will argue from when those decisions are made.
The honest summary is this. The world agreed on a good plan, has kept believing in it, and has fallen behind on delivering it. The reasons are now well understood, and the fixes are known. What remains uncertain is whether enough people and institutions choose to act on them in the narrow window that is left. That choice, repeated in thousands of places by governments, businesses, schools, and communities, is what the next four years come down to.
Source: Sachs, J.D., Lafortune, G., Fuller, G., Iablonovski, G. (2026). Implementing Sustainable Development: 2030 and Beyond. Sustainable Development Report 2026. Paris: SDSN; Dublin: Dublin University Press. Figures and findings as published on 23 June 2026. This is an independent 169to1® / Hudson Consultancy Online analysis of the report and is not authored by, or endorsed by, the report's authors or the SDSN.
I ❤ Free Fridays
12/12/2025
Today is your chance to have access to SDG 13 - Climate Action
Just click on the heart.
Offering Direction When Policy Moves Backwards
15/11/2025
Clarity, stability, and practical paths that do not depend on Brussels.
The Omnibus uncertainty, the legal challenges now looming over the European Commission, the 90 per cent cut to CSRD scope, and the wider setbacks emerging from COP30 have created a difficult moment. Educators feel the ground shifting beneath their teaching. SMEs worry that the rules change faster than they can plan. Yet this is exactly where a stable framework becomes most valuable.
The message we can offer is straightforward. The law may move, but the fundamentals of sustainability do not. Education still needs a simple way to teach responsible practice. SMEs still need clarity on what good looks like. Both groups want practical steps they can take today, without waiting for the next Parliament vote.
What We Can Provide Right Now
Reliable structure, stable learning, and action that stands even when the rules change.
We can offer three things with confidence.
1. A stable learning pathway for schools, colleges, and universities.
Students need a clear route into sustainability literacy. We can provide that through tools that teach real-world skills, not shifting regulations. The SDG-based approach remains solid because it is built on global consensus, not political cycles. Teachers can continue to use these resources knowing they will remain relevant.
2. A simple, practical framework SMEs can use for ESG and responsible business.
Instead of waiting for final CSRD wording, SMEs can work from principles that never change. Understanding their impact, improving governance, reducing waste, strengthening fairness, and documenting progress. These are not dependent on thresholds, exemptions, or ESRS revisions. They are good practice in any market and under any law.
3. A clear way to show proof, even when compliance rules are uncertain.
SMEs want to demonstrate progress without drowning in reporting. We can offer straightforward badge pathways, checklists, and short evidence requirements that help them track impact internally. If legislation tightens again, they will already have the structure and materials in place.
The Direction We Offer
Hope that is grounded in work people can start now.
At 169to1®, we are telling Educators and SMEs the same thing. You do not need to wait for Brussels or for leaders in Belém at COP30 to behave. You can take responsibility for your own teaching and business practices today, using simple tools that outlast political cycles. The rules may shift, but clarity, transparency, fairness, and responsible action do not.
This is the hope we offer. Not empty promises, but steady ground.
COP 30: Where We Stand Now
14/11/2025
The implications of falling away from 1.5 °C, and why clarity matters now.
Key Takeaways from COP30 So Far
A clearer picture of where the world stands, and why steady frameworks now matter.
1. A sharp reality check on the 1.5 °C limit
COP30 has accepted that staying below 1.5 °C is becoming far less achievable. Current national plans point towards 2.3–2.5 °C of warming unless action strengthens. The tone has shifted from optimism to course-correction. For 169to1, this reinforces the need for practical systems that help institutions act now rather than wait for perfect policy conditions.
2. Adaptation and resilience are rising in importance
Developing countries may require more than US$300 billion per year by 2035 to cope with storms, floods, fires, and other impacts. Mitigation remains essential, but adaptation is no longer secondary. ESG and SDG frameworks must build resilience indicators into their core design, not as optional additions.
3. Climate finance remains uncertain
The gap between what is promised and what is delivered is widening. There is renewed pressure to use public funds to unlock private investment. Debates around carbon markets continue to complicate planning. For organisations, this confirms that sustainability planning must include financial mobilisation, governance of funds, and transparent mechanisms, not only emissions targets.
4. Forests, land, and indigenous rights at the centre
Hosting COP30 in the Amazon has placed biodiversity, forest protection, and indigenous communities at the heart of discussions. Yet there are tensions, including Brazil’s continued approval of new oil exploration. For 169to1, this underlines the importance of including land-based indicators and rights-based approaches within your Selection and Activation pillars.
5. Geopolitical fragmentation is widening
Major emitters are not participating in full force, which weakens global coordination. Europe is trying to fill the gap, but is also balancing economic and security pressures. This environment demands ESG and SDG systems that can operate across shifting political landscapes. Your accreditation model already fits this need by focusing on local action and verifiable results.
6. Institutions face rising expectations
Organisations are being asked not just what they plan to do, but how and when they will do it. Long-term net-zero pledges are losing credibility without clear near-term steps. Finance, governance, land use, and resilience are becoming essential components of sustainability planning. This aligns directly with your badge-based compliance approach, which emphasises evidence, milestones, and integrity.
THE EU Omnibus Rollback
14/11/2025
What the EU’s rollback of sustainability rules means now, and why preparedness still matters.
A Weakened Framework
The EU has pushed through a political deal that strips back the key sustainability pillars that were meant to anchor the Green Deal. The alliance between the EPP and far-right groups has raised reporting thresholds, delayed technical standards, and removed several accountability mechanisms.
The core changes are clear:
CSRD thresholds jump to 1,750 employees or €450 million turnover, removing about ninety per cent of companies from mandatory sustainability reporting.
Sector-specific ESRS and non-EU company standards are postponed, reducing comparability and delaying alignment with global frameworks.
CSDDD is narrowed to only the very largest firms, above 5,000 employees and €1.5 billion turnover, with no civil liability and no binding transition-plan obligations.
Climate-transition planning requirements are deleted, taking pressure off firms to publish credible climate pathways.
Supply-chain accountability is weakened, leaving most European SMEs outside any mandatory human-rights or environmental due-diligence duties.
This shift is being framed as simplification, although in practice it marks a step away from the EU’s previous leadership on transparency, comparability and sustainability governance.
Why It Still Matters
Even with weakened rules, sustainability expectations do not vanish. Investors, multinationals, public institutions and consumers continue to demand reliable data. Supply-chain pressures will tighten because large companies still have to protect themselves from reputational risk. The global direction of travel is still toward disclosure, due diligence and climate alignment.
This moment offers clarity, but only clarity about a smaller regulatory footprint. It does not remove the broader business risk.
Preparedness Now
A short guide to help SMEs and mid-sized organisations stay ahead despite reduced obligations.
1. Keep a basic ESG baseline
Even if you are out of scope, it is still useful to maintain a simple baseline covering:
annual emissions snapshot (Scope 1 & 2 at minimum)
basic waste and resource-use data
key human-rights and worker-safety controls
a short, public ESG statement updated yearly
The aim is not perfection. It is continuity.
2. Track what your buyers require
Large companies still face expectations, even under weaker rules. That means many will push their suppliers for:
basic sustainability disclosures
governance evidence
human-rights risk screening
proof of responsible sourcing
Being able to respond quickly protects your contract position.
3. Keep a simple risk map
Map three areas: environmental risks, social risks, and governance gaps. Keep it short. Update it once a year. This allows you to respond to new rules without starting from zero.
4. Maintain credibility with clients and funders
Banks, investors, and grant-giving institutions increasingly ask for sustainability evidence. A light ESG framework helps you stay eligible even if legal obligations move.
5. Use voluntary standards as low-cost insurance
Choose one voluntary anchor, such as:
GRI basic indicators
UN Global Compact principles
ISO 14001-style environmental controls
a small set of ESRS datapoints (even if not mandatory)
Voluntary alignment makes future compliance easier and protects your reputation.
6. Build a micro-transition plan
It does not need to follow the now-deleted EU rules. A short plan covering energy use, efficiency improvements and waste reduction protects you from cost shocks and shows clients you take climate risks seriously.
What SMEs Can Still Do Outside the Scope
Practical actions that still create value even without mandatory rules.
Keep your story clean
Even without CSRD or CSDDD obligations, poor sustainability performance carries reputational and commercial risk. A short, credible sustainability page on your website is still a competitive advantage.
Protect your supply-chain position
You can still proactively send buyers a one-page ESG overview. This reduces friction and improves trust during procurement.
Build trust in your workforce
Simple steps on health and safety, wellbeing, and fair hiring practices help retention and reduce turnover. These are practical, low-cost wins.
Use transparency as a differentiator
Many competitors will stop at the legal minimum. You can use simple transparency to stand out. A basic ESG summary, updated each year, signals reliability.
Prepare for the next cycle
EU rules may shift again after elections, judicial challenges, or market pressure. If you maintain a light ESG structure, you won’t face a scramble later.
169to1® ESG LAW & CIRCULARITY UPDATE 2025
13/11/2025
A concise guide to the latest EU sustainability developments
This update brings together the most important regulatory and framework changes affecting sustainability reporting, due diligence, circularity and business practice in 2025. It is designed to sit alongside the existing 169to1® ESG Law materials and gives organisations a clear understanding of what has changed, what remains stable and what they should prepare for next.
1. Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD): Current Status
The EU has announced a simplification package that will reshape how CSRD applies, particularly for smaller companies. The core structure of the directive remains in place, but several practical elements are being adjusted.
What has changed
Reporting thresholds are expected to rise, which means fewer small companies will fall directly within scope.
SMEs are not required to report immediately and may follow voluntary standards until at least 2028.
The European Commission is reducing and simplifying the number of mandatory disclosure points to make reporting more manageable.
The principles of double materiality, transparency and accountability remain unchanged.
What this means for organisations
Businesses should continue preparing for CSRD-aligned reporting, but they should check updated thresholds and timelines as Member States begin transposing the revised rules. Even when not in mandatory scope, many companies will still be required to align with CSRD standards through supply-chain expectations.
2. European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS): Clarification
The ESRS now form the mandatory technical standards under CSRD. They define how companies assess impacts, risks and opportunities, how disclosures are structured and which data categories must be reported for governance, environmental and social performance.
Why this matters
CSRD is the law, but ESRS tell organisations what they must actually report. Any reference to CSRD should now be paired with clear acknowledgement of ESRS 1–12 to avoid misunderstanding and to maintain alignment with EU terminology.
3. Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD)
CSDDD was formally adopted in 2024. Member States will incorporate it into national law between 2026 and 2028.
It establishes legal expectations for human rights and environmental due diligence across supply chains.
Impact on SMEs
Most SMEs will not be directly regulated under CSDDD, but they will be affected indirectly. Larger companies will extend due-diligence requirements down their supply chains, which will place expectations on smaller firms to demonstrate responsible sourcing, labour standards, and environmental safeguards.
4. EU Taxonomy: New Environmental Delegated Acts
The EU has expanded the Taxonomy with additional environmental criteria linked to circular economy, pollution prevention, biodiversity, and water management. These new criteria sit alongside the existing climate objectives and broaden the range of activities that can be classified as sustainable.
Practical relevance
The Taxonomy is increasingly used in sustainable finance, bank lending criteria and investment screening. Businesses should review whether the expanded technical screening rules now apply to their operations, particularly in manufacturing, infrastructure, waste, agriculture or resource-intensive sectors.
5. Global Circularity Protocol for Business (2025)
The World Business Council for Sustainable Development, working with the United Nations’ One Planet Network, has released a global circularity framework designed for businesses of all sizes.
It provides a consistent method to define, measure and report circular performance.
What the protocol enables
Identification of circularity hotspots in products and value chains.
Development of circular strategies, targets and KPIs.
Measurement of circularity using globally comparable indicators.
Clear communication of circular progress in line with international expectations.
Why it matters to your ESG materials
Although the protocol is voluntary, it aligns closely with ESRS E5 and emerging circular-economy indicators in the EU Taxonomy. It is expected to become a reference point for organisations wishing to show credible progress on resource efficiency, product lifecycle management and waste reduction.
6. What Organisations Should Do Next
To stay aligned with the evolving landscape, organisations should:
Review their current ESG reporting approach and check whether updates to CSRD thresholds or timelines affect their obligations.
Familiarise themselves with ESRS 1–12 to understand the level of data and disclosure expected.
Prepare for contractual due-diligence requirements from partners who fall within CSDDD scope.
Check whether their sector is included in the EU Taxonomy’s expanded environmental criteria.
Consider adopting the Global Circularity Protocol to strengthen circularity reporting and align with international benchmarks.
7. How This Update Fits Within the 169to1® System
This guide supports all users of the 169to1® ESG Law Cheat Sheets, Business Packs, NGO Packs and Compliance Appendix.
It ensures that every part of the ecosystem continues to reflect the latest developments in EU sustainability law and global circularity practice.
A fuller revision will be issued once the EU finalises the CSRD simplification package and Member States complete transposition. Until then, this update should be read as the current reference point for 2025.
169to1® ESG Update 2025: Student Edition
This guide explains the most important changes happening in sustainability and business rules in 2025. It is written so that young people can understand how companies are expected to act, report and take responsibility for people and the planet.
13/11/2025
1. What is CSRD and what is changing?
CSRD is a set of rules in the European Union that tells companies what they must report about the environment, social issues and how they run their business.
In 2025 the EU is making CSRD a bit simpler.
What is changing:
Smaller companies may not have to follow the rules straight away.
Some may not have to report at all until later.
The list of things companies must report will be shorter and easier to follow.
Companies still need to show how they affect people and the planet.
Why this matters:
It helps make sure businesses tell the truth about their impact and do not hide important information.
2. What are ESRS?
ESRS are the detailed instructions that explain how companies report under CSRD.
Think of CSRD as the rulebook, and ESRS as the step-by-step guide.
Why it matters:
ESRS tells companies what information they must collect, such as their carbon footprint, how they treat workers or how they use resources.
3. What is CSDDD?
CSDDD is a new EU law about responsible supply chains.
It supports human rights and environmental protection.
What companies must do:
Check their suppliers are not harming workers or the environment.
Fix problems when they find them.
Prove they acted responsibly.
Why this matters for young people:
It helps stop child labour, unsafe workplaces and environmental damage in countries where companies buy their products.
4. What is the EU Taxonomy?
The EU Taxonomy is a list of activities that are considered environmentally friendly.
In 2024 it was expanded to cover more areas like:
protecting nature and wildlife
reducing waste and pollution
using water responsibly
supporting the circular economy
Why it matters:
Banks and investors use the Taxonomy to decide which projects deserve green funding.
It helps money flow to cleaner and fairer industries.
5. What is the Global Circularity Protocol?
This is a new worldwide guide that helps companies measure how well they use resources.
It helps companies to:
see where they waste materials
design products that last longer
reuse or recycle more
set clear goals to reduce waste
compare their progress with other companies
Why it matters:
We cannot keep taking, using and throwing things away.
This protocol helps businesses move towards a circular economy where materials stay in use for much longer.
6. Why should companies care about all of this?
Because customers, workers, students and communities expect companies to act responsibly.
These rules and frameworks:
protect workers
reduce pollution
improve transparency
support fairer global supply chains
encourage better decisions about the environment
For young people, this means a healthier planet, safer workplaces, and more honest businesses in the future.
7. What you should take away from this
CSRD is being simplified but still important.
ESRS tells companies exactly what to report.
CSDDD makes supply chains safer and fairer.
EU Taxonomy guides green investment.
Global Circularity Protocol helps companies cut waste and reuse more.
These changes shape how companies behave today and how your future career might look tomorrow.