In high-impact sectors, environmental targets, strategies and commitments are now a standard feature of corporate sustainability reports. However, some companies are moving beyond target-setting to strategic delivery, and their balance sheets, operations and brand equity are benefiting.
Our global survey of senior executives* identifies a group of leaders that say they’re ahead of their environmental goals, and are three times more likely than respondents on average to rate themselves as leading their sector on environmental performance.
The data tells a story that challenges the historical narrative of sustainability as a cost center. As these leaders demonstrate, robust environmental strategy and long-term profitability are not in tension; they’re increasingly inseparable.
The blueprint: What sets the environmental leaders apart?
The environmental leaders in our research operate in industries that have traditionally been seen as environmentally challenging, such as oil and gas, mining and chemicals.
What first distinguishes them is how deeply they have embedded environmental performance into their business strategies: 92% have an environmental strategy in place with clear targets and action plans, compared with 76% of the organizations in our research overall.
These leaders are also tying their environmental performance directly to growth: 83% say that environmental performance is a key pillar of their long-term growth strategy, compared with only 54% of the broader sample. And 93% publicly and regularly update their targets and progress, compared with 77% of organizations overall. Transparency about environmental performance builds credibility with investors, regulators and communities.
Operational discipline is another important characteristic of the environmental leaders. They track more environmental key performance indicators (KPIs) and are more confident about the systems that underpin them: they average 3.73 out of 5 for data confidence versus 3.46 across all organizations.
Strong accountability structures reinforce this discipline. Sustainability teams are most likely to hold primary or secondary responsibility for environmental performance, just as they do among most organizations in our research. But within the leading environmental organizations, the executive committee is more likely to play a direct role: 49% say accountability sits at this highest management level, compared to 43% across all organizations. This suggests that environmental leaders have established environmental performance as a priority for the board and the C-suite.
The payoff: Measurable returns on investment
Our survey shows that the environmental leaders are more likely than other organizations to be driven to carry out environmental measures by commercial motivations, such as supply chain pressures (50% vs 43%) and cost-reduction opportunities (41% vs 33%).
Moreover, compared with organizations overall, these leaders are getting more operational returns on investment from their environmental initiatives. They report higher rates of savings (exceeding 10%) across water use, energy consumption and waste management. This suggests that when a company systematically tracks and optimizes these inputs, its operational efficiency improves.
“Remediation is viewed as a cost center, but the environmental reserve affects the CFO’s and CEO’s year-end numbers directly,” says Hadley Stamm, remediation specialist at multinational chemicals company LANXESS. “If you can bring an environmental remediation project within or under budget, you’ve protected the company’s financial goals.”
The impact on financing is particularly striking. Among the environmental leaders, 80% say that their environmental performance has given them significantly better access to capital, including preferential investor terms, green financing and stronger sustainability ratings, compared with just 43% across all organizations. In a capital-intensive sector where the cost of financing large infrastructure and remediation programs can be substantial, this is material.
Companies that can demonstrate robust environmental performance are also winning more business: 57% of leaders see environmental performance as a core driver of competitive advantage and market growth, compared with just 30% of organizations overall.
The leaders are tackling short-termism
Even the leaders face barriers to implementing environmental programs and initiatives. Their most common challenge is balancing environmental investments with competing short-term financial priorities: 38%, compared with 30% across all organizations, say that this tension is their biggest barrier to improving environmental efficiency.
Taking a long-term view and maintaining a consistent approach is the most effective strategy, according to Elizabeth McGurk, methane sector leader at Onterris. “Environmental leaders focus on building robust, defensible and future-proof programs that generate reliable data for decision-making, rather than shifting strategy in response to political change,” she says.
Remediation programs that run across decades, emissions-abatement investments with long payback horizons and biodiversity commitments demand substantial capital upfront, and they compete for resources with near-term production and margin goals. Some companies address this with phased implementation strategies that spread costs across several years to generate early wins while pursuing long-term targets.
The environmental leaders are different: they have built incentive mechanisms that make sustainability a strategic priority for the long term. They’re more likely to link C-suite compensation to environmental KPIs, and these incentives are more likely to extend further down the organization to C-2-level executives. This integrates environmental performance into operational decision-making instead of confining it within sustainability departments.
Partnerships boost performance
Another defining characteristic of the environmental leaders is collaboration. They’re more likely to work with standards bodies and environmental consultants, and they consistently report better cost outcomes, stronger regulatory compliance and an enhanced reputation as a result.
Third-party expertise also addresses greenwashing scrutiny. Among the environmental leaders, 80% say their company is prepared to meet increasing scrutiny with robust, verified data, compared with 69% of organizations overall. When an organization seeks external assurance of its data and reports performance publicly, it reinforces the credibility of environmental claims.
The environmental leaders in our research show no sign of retreating from environmental focus: 72% say their company’s budget for environmental programs is increasing in 2026, compared with 59% across organizations overall. These are not defensive investments that they’re making because of regulatory pressure. Instead, they reflect the leaders’ confidence that environmental performance will continue to generate financial, operational and reputational returns. As stakeholder scrutiny intensifies, the companies that act now will be in a better position to build long-term value.
“Leaders recognize that the future is defined by greater accountability and transparency, and they use this to strengthen their businesses,” concludes McGurk.
Learn more about how leading organizations are getting ahead
Environmental leaders aren’t just meeting targets. They’re turning environmental performance into a source of competitive advantage, operational efficiency and long-term growth.
Explore the full Outlook report to discover the strategies, investments and governance practices helping organizations create lasting value and strengthen business performance.
Read the full Outlook report.
*About the research: In the winter of 2025–26, 500 senior decision-makers were surveyed to understand their approach to environmental performance. They were based in North America, Europe and Oceania and working in oil and gas, power generation, renewable energy, mining, industrial manufacturing, chemical manufacturing and solid waste/waste management. Their organizations had revenues ranging from $250 million to more than $5 billion.