2025 State of Supply Chain Sustainability Report
This report, jointly produced by the MIT Sustainable Supply Chain Lab and the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP), provides in-depth insights into how organizations are turning commitments into action, where progress is strongest, and what barriers remain.
This year's research is based on responses from 1,200 professionals across 97 countries, covering roles in supply chain, procurement, operations, logistics, and sustainability. This broad dataset captures a global perspective along with regional nuances, offering a comprehensive view of how supply chain sustainability is evolving.
This is the sixth annual report, exploring three main themes:
- The role of regulations: How government regulations influence corporate sustainability commitments, and how these impacts vary by region.
- Managing Scope 3: The tools, methods, and challenges companies face in measuring and reducing supply chain emissions, which often account for more than 75% of a company's carbon footprint.
- Freight transportation (a major contributor to Scope 3 emissions): Assessing expected technologies, adoption barriers, and strategic priorities for biofuels, battery-electric systems, and hydrogen-based solutions.
Key findings from 2025 show that, despite regulatory shifts, overall corporate commitment to sustainability remains resilient. 15% of companies reported a decrease in commitments, 12% an increase, and 73% no change—indicating that most organizations are maintaining their sustainability goals. However, only a minority have successfully translated beliefs into daily operations with measurable results, highlighting a persistent gap between strategy and execution.
This year's findings clearly demonstrate that setting public sustainability targets can act as a powerful catalyst—companies that set these targets are 74% more likely to invest in high-impact initiatives and embed sustainability into everyday decision-making.
Why do public targets serve as a catalyst? The catalytic effect of public sustainability targets primarily stems from "public accountability." When companies announce specific goals (such as emission reduction targets or circular economy commitments) to the public, investors, customers, and stakeholders, it creates external oversight pressure, forcing internal teams to integrate these goals into core operations.
The report points out that this mechanism generates stronger internal motivation, as companies must avoid reputational risks and prove the authenticity of their commitments. For example, companies with public targets are more inclined to invest in high-impact initiatives, including renewable energy adoption, product innovation, waste reduction, and circular economy models. In contrast, companies without public targets often lack this external driver, leaving sustainability stuck at the strategy-document level rather than becoming daily action.
When we look at ESG reports from listed companies, we find that many firms' materiality disclosures often only go as far as identifying material topics—and quite a few companies' material topics are things like "integrity in operations," "occupational hazard risks," etc., which clearly look like they were copied from templates without genuine review of the risks the company might actually face.
Some companies do list out risks, but lack corresponding policies, measures, or support—let alone public reduction targets like decarbonization.
Setting public targets is a strategic tool that can unlock internal resource allocation and enhance competitive advantage. The report recommends that companies start with clear, measurable goals (such as net-zero emission timelines) and strengthen accountability through stakeholder engagement.
For example, joining industry alliances (like SteelZero or RE100) can amplify the effect. Ultimately, public targets not only help companies respond to regulatory and market pressures but also bring long-term resilience and innovation, truly enabling sustainable transformation.
Other examples include SBTi and EcoVadis, which companies can leverage.
The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) is an international framework that helps companies set science-based emission reduction targets aligned with the Paris Agreement. According to multiple studies and surveys, companies participating in SBTi generally report positive impacts—not only environmental benefits but also extending to business competitiveness and financial performance. Advantages include: Enhanced competitive advantage—data shows that 91% of participating companies say setting science-based targets helps improve market competitiveness, allowing them to stand out among peers. This includes stronger market positioning and reinforced supplier relationships.
SBTi provides a credible target framework to validate the reasonableness of decarbonization goals. In governance terms, it forces senior management to set mid-term targets to manage departmental performance.
EcoVadis is a global supply chain sustainability rating platform that assesses companies' performance in environmental, social, and governance (ESG) areas, providing scores and certifications. Companies participating in EcoVadis often turn compliance into business advantages. EcoVadis establishes a unified assessment standard for supply chains, compelling suppliers to improve systems and data, which can then be internalized into procurement and supplier selection criteria. EcoVadis covers four main themes: sustainable procurement, labor & human rights, business ethics & ethics, and environment. Companies submit questionnaires, and EcoVadis rates them as Bronze, Silver, Gold, etc.
Whether it's RE100, SBTi, EcoVadis, or similar initiatives, they all involve setting public targets. Companies use these public declarations or disclosures to let stakeholders know about their decarbonization efforts.
If companies still have doubts about why they should pursue ESG, energy conservation, and carbon reduction, they might search for Susan Solomon, the American atmospheric chemist. She is best known for explaining the cause of the Antarctic ozone hole and driving the global international action that successfully repaired the ozone layer.
Her research provided the strongest evidence that CFCs were the primary culprit in ozone layer destruction, prompting the signing of the 1987 Montreal Protocol, which led to the global phase-out of CFCs and other ozone-depleting substances.
The progress on ozone layer recovery is currently very positive. In particular, the latest 2025 data shows that the Antarctic ozone hole continues on a long-term recovery trend. This is one of the most successful environmental restoration cases since the Montreal Protocol's global ban on ozone-depleting substances (ODS, such as CFCs).
The ozone hole can lead to increased skin cancer, cataracts, and more, as well as ecological disasters. By doing ESG, companies are essentially everyone contributing a part to saving the planet—allowing them to make money with peace of mind.
For the official full report, you can download or view it directly from the MIT Sustainable Supply Chain Lab website: https://sustainable.mit.edu/sscs2025/ or CSCMP's page.
留言
張貼留言