Finding value in a shifting climate reporting landscape

Two colleagues looking at sustanable architectural models and plans.
  • Insight
  • 10 minute read
  • February 05, 2026

In this article we explore ways that businesses can capitalise on the momentum of the climate reporting regime by focussing on disclosures that continue to support lasting value.

Video

Victoria Ashplant - Finding value in a shifting climate

Watch Victoria Ashplant, PwC partner, discuss ways that organisations can capitalise on momentum already achieved through climate reporting.

1:40
More tools
  • Closed captions
  • Transcript
  • Full screen
  • Share
  • Closed captions

Playback of this video is not currently available

Transcript

Shaping the right climate reporting regulation hasn’t been easy on businesses, but it has been highly effective at bringing the impact of climate to the board table. 

As organisations reflect on the latest changes in New Zealand1 and the mandatory rules of disclosure that fall away, we see an opportunity for businesses to rebalance the value equation in favour of reporting that truly matters to them and their investors. They are no longer thinking only of compliance, and instead, are freed to focus on reporting for value.

Whether affected by these changes or not many organisations are asking, what next? With significant time and resources invested in reporting, how can they ensure they continue to gain value from their efforts?

Stop, delay or consolidate? A moment to take stock

Regulatory change prompts a moment for businesses to take stock, assess progress, and make strategic choices which better fit their needs.

For companies that are no longer part of the regime and were preparing to report Scope 3 emissions and climate-related financial impacts in 2026, a pause in data gathering or reporting may be tempting – but the consequences are often underestimated when businesses want to reignite reporting practices. It can make financial sense to stay the course for a number of reasons:

  • Much of the groundwork was done in the first years of reporting and assurance. With systems now in place, the cost of preparing reporting on a voluntary basis is not as high as it was before. Businesses can expect to build efficiency gains and expedite return on investment with improving data quality, automation, and alignment with financial reporting cycles.
  • Reporting entities that have growth in mind should consider whether they may meet the revised market capitalisation thresholds in future. Climate reporting is part and parcel of being a top tier listed NZX company and businesses in this bracket, with ambition for growth in share value, might do well to maintain the disciplines of the climate reporting regime.
  • Methodologies for measuring emissions and assessing climate impacts will continue to evolve quickly. Taking a break could mean a steeper learning curve later to revisit measurement standards and approaches, rebuild assumptions and update systems that no longer meet expectations. Staff who built and supported processes may also move on, taking knowledge with them.

Finding the right balance is key.

Using the additional regulatory relief means businesses can progress voluntarily and at a pace that works for them. A proportionate approach that maintains the core benefits of reporting with appropriate levels of investment is likely to result in fewer remediation surprises and less disruption in the long term.

Those not captured by regulation may still find value in exploring where climate information could support decision-making and steer business operations aligned with their definition of value. More broadly, all organisations – whether currently, previously, or never captured by regulation – are increasingly looking beyond climate topics to consider how wider sustainability information can support strategy, performance and long-term value creation.

Redirect the focus of reporting from compliance to value creation

In response to regulation companies have developed new systems and processes to better understand how climate impacts their operations. They can now use that information to mitigate risk and uncover opportunities that protect and grow business value.

Alongside this they have developed external reporting capability that expresses that value outside of the business, translating internal insights into information that stakeholders can understand, trust, and act on.  This is the sweet spot where the value in climate reporting lies.

PwC’s Global Sustainability Reporting Survey 2025 found that most companies are seeing value from sustainability reporting that is above and beyond compliance. In fact, 70% of respondents cite that the data and insights are of moderate to significant value to their company. These insights remain highly relevant to New Zealand businesses, even as domestic requirements change.

Q: Beyond meeting compliance requirements, how much value do you think your company has obtained from the data and insights collected for CSRD/ISSB Reporting.

PwC Global Sustainability Reporting Survey 2025

The survey gathers responses from 496 executives and senior professionals at companies reporting, or preparing to report, under CSRD or ISSB requirements. It highlights how companies are translating reporting efforts into broader business value. More information on the survey methodology and participants can be found in the linked article.

What can NZ businesses learn from global reporting entities about extracting value from sustainability reporting?

More than half of surveyed organisations (56%) leverage sustainability insights and data for managing risks, and almost as many (48%) are using it in overall business strategy. The key objective of sustainability information should be to provide a company’s governing body with useful and reliable information that supports them in assessing the company’s position and defining its strategy. With the scale and pace of regulation easing, and systems now in place to manage compliance obligations, decision makers can focus on elements of sustainability information that are being actively used in the business to support decision-making.

Investor expectations remain unchanged, which is why reporting continues to play a central role and why, globally, companies use sustainability information to support investor engagement (36%) and corporate finance/investment decisions (29%). This shows that investors and lenders are using sustainability information to inform pricing and access decisions, and insightful data in this area can strengthen a business’ position in funding conversations.

Aside from gathering data to meet their own international reporting obligations, sustainability reporting has also become a means for suppliers to better understand, manage and improve performance across their value chains. Many companies surveyed (39%) are already using this information for supply chain transformation, which could include refinement in the supplier selection processes, strengthening risk management, or supporting decarbonisation initiatives across the value chain. For New Zealand exporters, the ability to provide reliable sustainability information quickly can be competitively advantageous to market access.

Around one-third of companies are using sustainability data and insights to support broader workforce and technology initiatives. New Zealand businesses have had to be agile to handle climate reporting preparations – responding quickly, working across functions, and adapting to new requirements which embeds a business delivery model that is useful beyond climate. New ways of working such as artificial intelligence will require rapid operational change, and the collective experience and skills gained in climate reporting makes companies better prepared for what is coming next.

Look to the future

Climate, and broader sustainability reporting have the potential to deliver value beyond regulatory compliance.  

Each company must explore what reporting activities, data points and analysis enable better business outcomes, and minimise what detracts. 

In New Zealand, all companies are able to voluntarily report additional climate and sustainability information, whether they are subject to regulatory requirements or not. Reporting on a voluntary basis gives organisations the opportunity to take a more selective and proportionate approach to suit individual business needs, while also anticipating future stakeholder or regulatory expectations.

It's an approach we are seeing globally too. Among companies affected by the CSRD 'Omnibus' delay1 and threshold changes, around half (51%) still plan to report on the same timeline but in a way that suits them. Some will continue with the CSRD (27%), others will use another framework (13%) or will report without aligning to a specific framework (11%).

Voluntary reporting sits outside of a regulatory regime so it will be important to maintain confidence in the information that is shared. For some organisations, this may mean identifying information where independent assurance could add value, particularly where decisions, investment, or stakeholder trust depend on it.

A renewed focus on what matters

It is our view that the trajectory for climate reporting in NZ businesses remains compelling: climate reporting is so much broader than compliance and the value case exists for businesses to produce information that supports strategy and strengthens decision making.

What comes next won’t look the same for everyone.

We trust the reduction in regulation will help some businesses, that are struggling to balance the value equation, land an approach that feels workable for the business and that reflects its definition of value.

Climate, and broader sustainability reporting has evolved quickly, and in moving from the abstract to the practical, has become a value-adding tool for many New Zealand businesses. Staying engaged and invested in reporting, at a proportionate level, will leave businesses better placed to protect, and even increase, corporate value through climate change.

The status of New Zealand climate reporting regulations and key international regulations

New Zealand

In October 2025 the government confirmed it will raise the listed-issuer threshold for climate reporting entities (CREs) from $60m to $1b market capitalisation and also removed managed investment schemes from the regime. This was followed by a FMA clarification that entities falling out of scope under the new thresholds will not need to continue reporting or obtain assurance for periods ending on or after 31 December 2025, in anticipation of the legislative changes taking effect in early 2026.

Further to this, the External Reporting Board confirmed, as a result of consultation, a two-year extension to adoption provisions for reporting scope 3 GHG emissions and climate-related financial effects; and a two-year delay to scope 3 GHG emissions assurance requirements.

EU CSRD/ESRS

The Omnibus Simplification Package was proposed by the European Commission on 26 February 2025, to amend the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and the EU Taxonomy Regulation. Alongside this the European Commission requested that the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), which is responsible for drafting the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), undertake a review aimed at simplifying these standards.

Certain aspects of the proposal have been agreed, including a two-year delay to reporting and assurance requirements for entities captured in the ‘second wave’ of companies (previously expected to report for periods starting 1 January 2025). Other elements continue to progress. Revised size thresholds for entities in scope have been politically agreed but are not yet formally enacted or transposed into national law, and EFRAG has delivered its advice on ESRS simplifications, which are pending adoption by the European Commission.

ISSB

Global adoption practices are mixed. At the date of this article the ISSB have identified 33 jurisdictions that have formally announced or finalised decisions on adoption or other use of ISSB Standards, have otherwise introduced sustainability-related disclosure requirements, or are in the process of developing an approach.

Requirements for reporting and assurance are also varied. Some countries move forward, while others have stepped back. For example, in August 2025 Singapore delayed scope 3 GHG emissions reporting and assurance requirements by five-years to FY2030 and FY2032 respectively. However, jurisdictions such as Australia and Brazil maintain explicit timelines for preparing a full ISSB report and obtaining reasonable assurance over that full report within the next few years. Others have introduced lighter mandatory requirements - no assurance, limited assurance with no progression to reasonable, or assurance on GHG emissions only.

Visit PwC’s Viewpoint page for ‘in-brief’ and ‘in-depth’ publications covering updates in the global sustainability reporting landscape.

About the author(s)

Victoria  Ashplant
Victoria Ashplant

Sustainability Assurance Partner, PwC New Zealand

Value in Motion

AI, climate change and geopolitical shifts are reconfiguring the global economy. Read our global thought leadership that maps where value is moving over in the next decade.

Insights and Publications

Get the latest insights, news, and publications covering multidisciplinary sectors, industries, and economic developments that help shape the business landscape in New Zealand.

Follow us