The climate conversation has shifted. Now reporting must adapt with it.
By Margherita Barbieri, Senior Manager — GRI Standards
Reflecting on what was an intense time of engagement and debate at London Climate Action Week, one message surfaced again and again — not from one speaker or one panel, but across conversations between policymakers, investors, businesses and civil society.
And that is that the debate is no longer about whether we should act on climate change. It is increasingly shifting to how we deliver the transition.
For years, climate discussions have been dominated by long-term commitments and goals. Those remain essential. But today there is growing recognition that pledges alone are not enough. Governments are looking for implementation. Investors want credible transition strategies. Financial institutions need better information to direct capital. Companies are under pressure to demonstrate not just intention, but progress.
That shift was reflected in the Climate Innovation Forum at LCAW. Rachel Kyte, UK Special Representative for Climate, emphasized implementation, energy security and mobilizing private capital, while Türkiye’s COP31 Presidency highlighted the role of the proposed Climate Implementation Bridge in connecting finance with real-world projects.
This conversation has profound implications for sustainability reporting. As GRI CEO Robin Hodess put it, the conversations in London reinforced that turning climate ambition into action depends on meaningful data. Disclosure must move beyond describing risks and aspirations to providing credible information about impacts and transition pathways.
From climate commitments to climate delivery
A theme throughout the week was the emergence of what can be called a ‘two-track’ climate agenda. This distinction between global negotiations and practical delivery surfaced repeatedly, from discussions on national transition planning and investment roadmaps to the COP31 Presidency’s emphasis on implementation over new commitments.
International negotiations remain essential for setting shared goals, but implementation is increasingly being driven through coalitions of governments, investors, businesses and civil society. Roadmaps and transition plans are becoming the practical architecture of climate action, creating greater demand for reporting that shows where impacts occur and where investment is most needed.
As we heard from Selwin Hart — UN Special Adviser on Climate Action and Just Transition — in the second decade of the Paris Agreement:
The question is no longer whether the transition happens but how to accelerate it.
High-quality data helps organizations move faster, to improve understanding of these impacts, and drive greater progress. And this means that climate reporting should not be in a silo — understanding the interconnections with nature and society reveal crucial insights on the proactive measures required.
Adaptation is finally receiving the attention it deserves
Perhaps the most notable shift during London Climate Action Week was the prominence of adaptation and resilience. For years, climate discussions focused on mitigation — reducing emissions to limit future warming. That remains fundamental.
But with global temperatures continuing to rise and the impacts of climate change becoming increasingly visible, particularly on vulnerable groups and communities, adaptation is moving rapidly from a secondary consideration to a strategic necessity.
Whether discussing infrastructure, financial stability, insurance markets, food systems or urban planning, we need to prepare for the physical impacts of climate change alongside efforts to cut emissions.
As reinforced by Jim Skea, Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, adaptation will receive significantly greater attention in their forthcoming new Assessment Report. Meanwhile, Sarah Kapnick (Chief Scientist of the World Meteorological Organization) highlighted that physical climate risks are already becoming material for business across industries.
This means corporate reporting must explain how businesses are adapting, building resilience and supporting communities through the transition. These questions cannot be answered through financial metrics or emissions data alone; they require reporting that considers impacts on people, ecosystems and local economies, alongside enterprise value.
Better data leads to better decisions
One discussion involving policymakers and regulators explored how corporate transition disclosures can inform national climate strategies, fiscal policy, industrial planning and infrastructure investment, illustrating that sustainability reporting is increasingly viewed as a public policy asset, not simply a corporate obligation.
This represents an important evolution. Sustainability reporting has often been viewed as information flowing in one direction: from companies to investors, regulators and stakeholders.
Increasingly, reporting has the potential to become part of a wider feedback loop.
Corporate disclosures can help policymakers understand where barriers exist, which technologies require greater support, where infrastructure is lacking, and how public policy can accelerate implementation. However, this opportunity depends on reporting that is sufficiently robust, comparable and decision-useful.
Why impact reporting matters more than ever
Climate action is increasingly interconnected with energy security, economic competitiveness, industrial strategy and social resilience. These issues cannot be understood in isolation.
The address by UN Secretary-General António Guterres reinforced that climate action requires social justice, adaptation, environmental control of AI data centers, greater climate finance and investment in resilience, and stronger information integrity alongside emissions reductions.
This chimes with the reality organizations face every day. Their decisions create impacts across value chains, communities and ecosystems, which shape future risks and affect long-term business resilience.
It is both logical and essential that these impacts are fully reflected in corporate reporting.
The GRI Standards help organizations understand and communicate their impacts in a comparable and credible way. And with the GRI 102 Climate Change Standard, organizations are encouraged to take a holistic view; one based not only on emissions but, crucially, actions to support climate adaptation and transition — including a just transition.
Especially when it comes to climate reporting, balancing the impact perspective alongside financial risks and opportunities becomes increasingly important. Organizations and investors need both lenses.
Looking ahead
With preparations underway for COP31 in Türkiye, attention is now turning from negotiating ambition towards implementing existing commitments. The next phase of climate action will depend not only on stronger policies, but on better information to guide investment and quicken progress.
London Climate Action Week showed that the climate conversation has entered a new phase. The question is no longer whether organizations set climate commitments, but whether they can demonstrate that progress. This makes sustainability reporting not just a disclosure exercise, but an essential part of delivering the transition.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Margherita Barbieri is Climate Change Lead at GRI, where she managed the project to develop the new GRI 102 Climate Change and GRI 103 Energy Standards, launched in 2025, and now oversees the climate implementation projects portfolio.
Prior to joining GRI in 2022, she worked in the food and beverage industry, specializing in sustainability marketing. Margherita also led the World Economic Forum circular economy initiative, Scale 360°, in Turin. She completed the Executive Programmes in Corporate Sustainability and Leadership from Saïd Business School, and holds an MA in International Relations from the University of Turin.
