20 June, 2025

2025 has been an interesting year so far, to put it mildly.  

Perhaps it was obvious that Trump would explode on to the global stage right from inauguration day, but even so the scale and force of the change he has set in motion is remarkable. It can feel like every time you refresh a news feed there is another body blow to the sustainability movement.  

Drill baby Drill. Exit the Paris Accord and the WHO. Start a furious and far-reaching vendetta against DEI. Gut USAID.    

And while Trump may be setting the weather, the start of the year has also seen a wave of populism run through Europe and sustainability and ESG are firmly in the firing line. Here in the UK we have Nigel Farage topping polls and vowing to ‘scrap’ both Net Zero and the DEI agenda, promising billions of savings to be spent on ‘the people.’ 

All this builds on existing pressures to create a radical shift in the landscape.  

Bang goes what had begun to seem like a progressive consensus around many of sustainability’s key tenets. The imperative of taking on the climate crisis through adaptation and mitigation and managing our impact on resources, nature and biodiversity. Doing so in a just way. Embracing the concept of equity and looking to build inclusive and diverse workplaces. Seeing regulation as a way of ensuring minimum standards and standardising reporting so that companies’ performance can be compared and recognised. The belief that international corporate collaboration is beneficial. We could go on. 

It is important to accept that this is happening. Sustainability is facing headwinds as never before, and they are powerful ones.  

So the next question is what the sustainability movement, and the progressive companies within it, should do now in order to be better prepared for the future? How do we get back on the front foot, and balance the short term reality with the long term imperative for change? 

The first step to recovery is to admit there’s a problem… 

We at Good Business like to think of ourselves as pioneers of the sustainability movement. For coming up to 30 years we have been beating its drum, and we believe in the principle of building your business by doing good more than we ever have before. This frames everything.  

But it doesn’t stop us thinking that some elements of the criticism against sustainability are valid and in some cases the sustainability movement may have gone too far.  

The last decade was an age of lofty, evangelical statements of purpose. Of corporate leaders weighing in on every cultural issue under the sun. Of an explosion of funds taking on ESG labels and proclaiming their activist credentials.  

The broad ascendancy of sustainability also gave rise to it becoming normal and expected for big, global companies to make sweeping statement of intent and commit to ambitious targets. There was a lot of non-ironic talk about setting Big Hairy Audacious Goals.  

Having a clear path to delivery was not considered a pre-requisite to the setting of these goals, if anything it was the opposite. Current reality was an unnecessary constraint on possible future advancement. This rationale wasn’t unreasonable. It stemmed from a confidence that market solutions would present itself as momentum grew and systems shifted, that the future markers in the sand would spur the innovation that would make achieving them possible.  

But, some might say predictably, this approach has also created challenges.  

Companies have made progress, particularly in the years immediately following targets being set. In many cases this progress was tangible, exciting and meaningful. But as time has passed, and the easy wins have been taken, continuing to deliver this change has become harder, and the likelihood of meeting many of these targets has slipped away. In many cases the systems haven’t changed – and while there has been innovation and new solutions, these have been piecemeal and only able to deliver incremental change. 

So we’ve seen some targets being quietly dropped. Dates being reconfigured. Scope being reigned in.  

At the same time, there has been increased scrutiny – in relation to business ambition, but also to brand claims and investor labels and plans. This was also an age that coined the terminology of greenwashing, purpose washing and ESG washing (among others). The clear subtext? The sustainability talk does not always live up to the reality.  

All this has combined to create a confidence gap, both within and outside of the business world.   

And while it doesn’t explain all of the populists’ fire, it did open a door to let them in. 

So where do we go from here? 

 

A move from we to me 

The first step is to face into the cultural shift.  

This might sound obvious, but as the world changes, business needs to change with it. ‘Standing firm’ and ‘sticking to your guns’ is not necessarily the answer, even if it might instinctively feel right. Business is inextricably interlinked with politics and society. It can and must be guided by the context in which it is operating. Sustainability works when it delivers business advantage. The value proposition holds but the calculus around it changes as the world does.  

This isn’t at all about giving up. It’s about being smart and strategic about what you focus on, how you talk about them, and what you put aside. 

We’ve heard the recent change in the times being described as a move from ‘we’ to ‘me.’ It characterises the new lens being applied to political decision making the trade wars and the slashing of development budgets, the geopolitical realignments and the vulnerability of multilateral institutions.   

And much as it might seem counter-intuitive, we actually think it’s a useful frame for sustainability in these uncertain times. 

This is not a time for towering proclamations about changing the world for the better, or for using a business or brand to achieve noble ends that are disconnected from what it does. 

Instead, the first order lens on sustainability decisions, particularly those about when and where to go further, faster, and look to forge differentiation, should be whether the action will drive long term business value. It’s not a ‘we’ decision about ideals. It’s a ‘me’ decision about what makes business sense for your organisation, your customers, your customers and your value chain.  

This might be because of the reputation benefit. It might be from an operational efficiency perspective. It might be because it will build the brand and the bond people have with it. 

This is also a vital part of building resilience into your business. It’s only when you have deeply understood how social and environmental issues interact with your business model now and into the future that you can set yourself up to protect yourself from risk and withstand future shocks.  

This will be different for every business but the calculus is the same. The areas to push on from a sustainability perspective are those that sit at the heart of the business and help build its strategy for future sustainable growth. 

From BHAG to CPAG 

We also need to inject a dose of reality into goal setting. A shift from Big Hairy Audacious Goals to Clear Pathways to Achievable Goals. It’s not as catchy. Maybe not as fun. It might mean a scaling back, and a refinement and thinning down of core business commitments. But it’s in the service of making sure that the change that is promised is delivered and credibility is restored.  

Unilever is an interesting case in point. It has long been a poster child for sustainability. Paul Polman once described his job as being like running the world’s largest NGO. It set audacious goals, and embraced the idea that every brand should have a purpose. 

It’s recently undergone a significant process of recalibration. It hasn’t retreated from the fundamentals: companies have enormous potential to create change, social and environmental issues are inextricably interlinked with doing business, consumers care about how brands behave.   

But it has reconfigured its priorities and plans. It summarises it aptly. “Ringing the alarm and setting long-term ambitions isn’t good enough anymore. Now is the time to focus on delivering impact by making sustainability progress integral to business performance.” 

Its new Growth Action Plan is designed to focus on fewer things, done better, with greater impact.  

It’s fair to say this news wasn’t greeted with universal enthusiasm. Unilever’s bosses should ‘hang their head in shame’ said Greenpeace, in a comment echoed by many others.  

And in all honesty our initial reaction wasn’t positive. But with the benefit of hindsight it becomes a well-pitched move. And others have followed suit, Pepsi being the most recent example.  

It’s a growing up, a maturing of sustainability. One that is necessary. That gives it the defences it needs to stand firm to critics. And one that we believe can power it into the future. 

Make no mistake – this is why we think it needs to be done. The recalibration is an essential pre-requisite to further long term action – it is a beginning that is a long way from the end.  

 

Recalibrate to recharge and revitalise 

The scale of the change that is needed to protect our climate and nature, and to help address seemingly intractable social issues is monumental. And the need for action grows more urgent every day.  

This might make a plea for a reigning in of sustainability seem ill-judged, even irresponsible. But we believe the process of making sustainability a driver of business value, which sits at the absolute core of a company’s growth plans, and a recalibration of ambitions to ensure they are achievable is the best chance we have of setting business onto a path to meaningful change. 

This is about right-sized sustainability, that delivers impact, and in so doing gathers force and power and credibility.  

It also puts businesses back on the front foot. When an organisation knows that a sustainability decision is a key driver of value for its business, and it has a CPAG that sets out the change it will deliver in the next 5 to 10 years, then it will and should have the confidence to communicate with conviction, even if it risks raising the ire of those on the other side of some moral, political or cultural divide.  

It sets the lines of which battles are worth fighting. Because if you’re convinced that your stance on inclusion or your choice of raw materials or your investment in value chain workers will drive business resilience and value creation then you will be ready to take everyone on. 

And this matters too. We don’t want businesses to be cowed into staying quiet. To keep their heads down even when they’re doing things they’re proud of.  

We want action, and the talk that can then rightfully go with it. 

It’s a way to reclaim the narrative. To create a new era of sustainability that is born into and out of these times. One that provides a powerful counterweight to the forces railing against it, and which moves us all purposefully forward. It’s a stepping stone to transformation, that recognises we can’t get there unless we bring people with us. 

The tune changes, the music stays the same.  

By Larissa Persons