Corporations today face pressure from regulators, investors, and employees to prove progress on their goals pertaining to sustainability. However, companies tend to either over-index on a single high-profile number (like carbon tons) or set goals that are vague, immeasurable, or irrelevant to material risks, which all end of proving difficult to demonstrate progress on. In 2025, stakeholders expect corporations to define progress with the same rigor they apply to financial performance. Metrics need to be material, measurable, and comparable.
But what metrics should companies actually track? Tracking progress should be about more than vanity dashboards or overloading teams with KPIs in 2025. Instead, companies should be identifying the few metrics that actually signal movement toward strategic objectives. This means companies need to track the right categories of sustainability metrics (carbon, water, waste, supply chain, biodiversity, governance) while also ensuring those metrics are designed for leading indicators, accountability, adaptability, and impact.
Core Categories of Sustainability Metrics
Below are the essential categories and the key metrics within each. These are the numbers that matter for corporations serious about turning sustainability pledges into measurable progress.
| Category | Key Metrics to Track | Why It Matters |
| Carbon Emissions & Energy | -Scope 1, 2, and increasingly Scope 3 emissions -Energy use intensity (kWh per sq. ft. or per $ revenue) – % of renewable energy sourced | Core to net zero strategies and climate disclosures. Energy intensity normalizes emissions against growth, while renewables sourcing shows transition progress. |
| Water | – Total withdrawal and discharge – Water stress analysis (site-level, WRI Aqueduct) – % of water recycled/reused | Water risk is highly localized; site-specific metrics help companies anticipate scarcity, meet regulations, and avoid stranded assets. Recycling/reuse tracks efficiency gains |
| Waste & Materials | – Diversion rate (landfill vs. recycled/composted) – Hazardous waste generated – Material circularity (% of products recycled or reused) | Waste impacts cost, compliance, and brand reputation. Circularity metrics reflect how well companies are advancing toward circular economy goals. |
| Supply Chain & Procurement | – % of suppliers with disclosed GHG data – Emissions from top-tier suppliers – ESG performance of procurement categories | Scope 3 emissions can account for 70–90% of a corporate footprint. Supplier disclosure and category-level ESG ratings are critical for transparency and reduction. |
| Biodiversity & Land Use | – Land footprint of operations – Habitat restoration or offset projects – Impacts on biodiversity hotspots | New frameworks like TNFD and CSRD demand biodiversity reporting. These metrics demonstrate how corporate activity affects ecosystems and how companies restore balance. |
| Social & Governance (ESG) | – Workforce diversity targets (% women/underrepresented groups in leadership) – Employee engagement scores tied to sustainability – Board-level oversight of ESG | Sustainability is not just environmental. Governance and workforce engagement are now key expectations for investors, regulators, and employees alike. |
1. Carbon Emissions & Energy: The Foundation of Net Zero
Carbon remains the most scrutinized sustainability metric. Tracking Scope 1, 2, and increasingly Scope 3 emissions provides the baseline for all climate targets. But totals alone don’t always show performance. That’s why intensity metrics like kWh per square foot or per dollar of revenue are so critical. They normalize performance against growth.
Another crucial measure: renewable energy sourcing. It’s not enough to report “green power purchased.” Companies should disclose how much energy is contracted under PPAs, how much is backed by RECs, and how much is generated on-site. These details reveal whether a company is making structural changes or simply offsetting.
2. Water: Localized Risk, Global Scrutiny
Water is rapidly becoming as material as carbon, especially in high-stress regions. Investors and regulators increasingly expect site-level water stress analysis aligned with WRI’s Aqueduct tool. Total withdrawal and discharge show magnitude, but the real insight comes from context: how much water is drawn in a region facing scarcity.
The percentage of water recycled or reused is a direct measure of efficiency. Companies in sectors like manufacturing, agriculture, and real estate can show meaningful progress by reducing dependency on fresh water sources.
3. Waste & Materials: Moving Toward Circularity
Waste is an operational issue as well as a reputational one. High diversion rates (keeping material out of landfills) demonstrate operational efficiency and climate impact. Tracking hazardous waste generated is also essential, as regulators clamp down on toxic disposal practices.
Circularity metrics go a step further: what percentage of materials are recycled, reused, or designed for a second life? These numbers move companies from linear “take-make-dispose” models toward truly circular systems, increasingly demanded by customers and supply chain partners.
4. Supply Chain & Procurement: The Scope 3 Frontier
For most corporations, Scope 3 emissions account for the majority of the footprint. Yet few track them effectively. Metrics like % of suppliers disclosing GHG data and emissions from top-tier suppliers expose where transparency gaps remain.
Beyond emissions, procurement ESG performance metrics matter. Which categories (e.g., packaging, raw materials, logistics) carry the highest ESG risks? Tracking by category helps companies prioritize interventions instead of spreading efforts thin.
5. Biodiversity & Land Use: The Next Reporting Frontier
Frameworks like TNFD (Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures) are pulling biodiversity into the spotlight. Companies are expected to quantify their land footprint, disclose impacts on biodiversity hotspots, and demonstrate investments in habitat restoration or offset projects.
These metrics go beyond carbon, forcing companies to grapple with their broader ecological footprint. For industries in real estate, extractives, agriculture, or retail, this reporting is rapidly becoming non-optional.
6. Social & Governance Metrics: Embedding ESG in Culture
Sustainability is not purely an environmental exercise. Diversity targets (like % women or underrepresented groups in leadership), employee engagement scores tied to sustainability programs, and board-level ESG oversight are now standard indicators.
Investors and regulators (including CSRD and ISSB) expect ESG to be embedded in governance structures. Without strong governance metrics, even the most ambitious environmental programs lack credibility.
Beyond Categories: How to Evaluate Whether Metrics Really Matter
Having the right categories isn’t enough. Many companies still fall into traps of tracking too many lagging indicators, avoiding accountability, or failing to adapt metrics as conditions shift. Here’s the framework for ensuring sustainability metrics drive real outcomes:
1. Leading vs. Lagging Metrics
Companies need both, but should lean into leading indicators that allow mid-course corrections rather than post-mortems.
- Leading metrics predict future performance and give early signals in real time
- % of suppliers providing Scope 3 data
- Energy efficiency project completion rates
- % of renewable energy contracted vs. planned
- water reuse percentage
- Lagging metrics report outcomes (e.g., total carbon footprint, water withdrawal, landfill diversion rate).
2. Alignment Metrics
Even the right categories fail if ESG goals sit in a silo. Alignment metrics reveal whether ESG progress is tied to business performance:
- % of sustainability targets linked to financial KPIs
- Cross-functional project completion rates (e.g., facilities + procurement + finance)
- Employee engagement scores tied to climate initiatives
4. Adaptability Metrics
Climate disclosure laws, stakeholder demands, and energy market shocks change fast. Adaptability metrics track resilience:
- Average time to adjust KPIs after regulatory change
- % of goals revised mid-year with documented rationale
- % of supplier data integrated after ESG disclosure changes
5. Impact Metrics
Finally, the point of tracking is impact. Investors, boards, and employees want to know: are sustainability efforts delivering?
- Absolute emissions reductions year-over-year (Scopes 1, 2, 3)
- $ saved per kWh avoided
- % waste diverted from landfill
- % renewable energy achieved vs. SBTi pathway
Conclusion: Building Investor-Grade Sustainability Tracking
Sustainability reporting is evolving fast and regulators, investors, and employees are raising the bar in 2025 and beyond. Companies that succeed won’t just list carbon, water, or waste data; they’ll evaluate those metrics through the lens of leading vs. lagging, alignment, accountability, adaptability, and impact.
That’s how goals shift from being corporate promises to measurable proof.
