The Trick To A Useful Climate Transition Action Plan? Don’t Make It A Report!

With the recently announced rollback of CSRD requirements, many sustainability professionals could be forgiven for breathing a secret sigh of relief. Transparency is a good thing but generating a mountain of compliance for a report very few people are ever likely to read is a thankless task.

I know that feeling all too well, having led in-house sustainability for years before becoming an advisor to others. Sweating blood to issue reports that will have minimal consequences in the real-world is one of the least fulfilling parts of the job. These reports, typically thick with well-meaning pledges and carefully selected case studies, have frequently fallen short on one key measure: usefulness. That is, usefulness to the executives tasked with running companies in a turbulent global economy while navigating the most profound industrial transformation since the first flickers of the steam engine.

Which is why I am so dedicated to ensuring that the Climate Transition Action Plans (CTAPs) that I help develop don’t fall into the ‘just another report’ trap.

Where ESG reports are retrospective, descriptive and largely public relations exercises, CTAPs are their sharper, leaner, and far more practical cousins. They are forward-looking, analytically rigorous, and unapologetically strategic — the kind of planning tool that no serious executive can afford to ignore.

A good CTAP does not bury itself in vague ambitions. It offers a structured, data-driven roadmap for how a company intends to transition to a low-carbon business model — and how it will remain competitive while doing so. This is no abstract sustainability exercise; it is core business strategy for a world increasingly shaped by carbon prices, regulatory crackdowns and shifting consumer preferences.

Today, there are companies setting the bar:

IKEA’s Net Zero Transition Plan stands out for its granular approach to supply chain emissions, particularly around raw materials and product design. By targeting reductions in carbon intensity across its value chain and linking supplier financing to carbon performance, IKEA has embedded climate into procurement — ensuring the transition cascades down to thousands of suppliers.

INTEL’s Climate Action Plan provides a technology-led roadmap, focusing on the integration of technology to monitor and optimise carbon performance across global operations. Intel also prioritises innovation pipelines that directly respond to low-carbon market opportunities, positioning the company to capitalise on the climate tech boom.

Procter & Gamble (P&G) has produced a particularly finance-focused CTAP, linking decarbonisation milestones to capital investment decisions and embedding climate risk into asset valuation processes. P&G’s emphasis on product innovation — such as lower-carbon consumer products and circular packaging — aligns its transition plan with core revenue drivers.

Ørsted, the Danish energy giant, offers a model for industrial transformation, detailing how it moved from a fossil-heavy utility into one of the world’s largest renewable energy companies. Ørsted was an early mover into Climate Transition planning helping to set the bar for others.

The best CTAPs begin with a dispassionate appraisal of climate risk and opportunity, breaking down both physical and transition risks across the company’s value chain. They identify where climate change could disrupt operations, markets and supply chains — and where new revenue streams could emerge. Crucially, they also quantify these risks in financial terms, integrating climate into capital allocation decisions, not just into corporate brochures.

Where ESG reports tend to focus on what has been done — the low-hanging fruit of carbon disclosure or energy efficiency upgrades — CTAPs focus on the hard choices ahead. They map technological pathways, identifying which emerging low-carbon technologies can credibly support decarbonisation goals, and which are too speculative to bet the business on. They explicitly link these decisions to board-level oversight and executive incentives, ensuring accountability is embedded at the top.

In Futerra’s extensive benchmarking on CTAPs, we’ve identified that the most useful are scenarios-based, recognising that climate strategy is not a one-shot declaration but an exercise in managing uncertainty. They test corporate strategies against multiple plausible climate futures — from orderly transitions to chaotic regulatory shocks — ensuring resilience in an unpredictable policy landscape. This is what makes them so useful for decision-making: they do not simply show what the company hopes to achieve, but how it will pivot if conditions change.

If ESG reports are the corporate equivalent of lifestyle blogs — aspirational, image-conscious, and full of good intentions — CTAPs are more akin to actually working out an exercise regime for a marathon you are actually going to run. They are business plans for a low-carbon economy. They do not set out to please activists or shareholders with ambitious targets alone; in my work on them, we set out to inform strategic choices, helping companies determine which assets to invest in, which business models to phase out, and which partnerships to cultivate in an accelerating transition.

Far from being just another sustainability deliverable, the CTAP are a critical tool of corporate survival — the difference between those who navigate climate transition profitably, and those who are overtaken by it.

...

Please contact our team hello@wearefuterra.com for a deeper dive on what leadership looks like in 2025/26 and support for both action and messaging in changing times.