In a previous article, ESG at the Cutting-Edge: Building Systems that Learn, Adapt, and Benefit from Change, I argued that the future of ESG would be defined less by frameworks and more by systems. Systems that learn. Systems that adapt. Systems that improve decision-making as the world changes.
As we move into 2026, that future is no longer theoretical.
The defining question for sustainability is no longer, “Should we take this seriously?” It has become, “Have we built the systems to manage it properly?”
Across regions and sectors, regulation, markets, and geopolitics are pushing sustainability into the core of how organisations operate. The trends below show where this is heading and why the next phase of sustainability will be won or lost on execution, not intent.
Sustainability moves into the core enterprise operating model
Sustainability is no longer a peripheral function or a specialist reporting exercise. Regulation across Europe, Australia, parts of Asia, and increasingly through market pressure in the US is embedding sustainability directly into finance, procurement, risk management, and governance.
Climate and sustainability data now influences capital allocation decisions, supplier selection, pricing strategies, insurance availability, and access to finance. This is not happening because companies suddenly became more idealistic. It is happening because sustainability risks and impacts are now business-critical inputs.
A clear example is how banks and insurers are adjusting pricing and coverage based on climate exposure, transition risk, and supply-chain risk. In practice, this forces sustainability data into credit committees and risk models whether organisations feel ready or not.
The implication is simple: sustainability can no longer sit alongside the business. It has to be built into it.
The rise of the sustainability operating system
As sustainability becomes core, organisations are running into a practical constraint. Spreadsheets, manual processes, and disconnected tools simply do not scale.
We are seeing a rapid shift toward what many now call a sustainability operating system or ESG tech stack. These platforms are designed to manage sustainability data across the organisation, monitor emerging risks and regulatory change, support assurance, and provide decision-useful insights to management and boards.
This mirrors the evolution of finance decades ago. Financial reporting did not mature because standards improved alone. It matured because systems were built to support consistency, control, and analysis.
A growing number of large organisations are now consolidating climate data, materiality, value-chain mapping, and regulatory tracking into single platforms because they have learned that fragmentation creates operational risk.
The companies moving fastest are not chasing technology for its own sake. They are responding to complexity.
Materiality becomes a living intelligence system
Within the sustainability operating system, materiality is increasingly positioned at the centre, and it is changing character.
Leading organisations are moving away from materiality as a periodic compliance snapshot. Instead, materiality is evolving into an ongoing process that monitors risks, impacts, dependencies, and opportunities as conditions change.
This reflects the shift I described previously, from one-off assessment to continuous intelligence. Regulatory developments, geopolitical shifts, supply-chain disruptions, technological change, and stakeholder expectations no longer align neatly with annual reporting cycles. Materiality cannot remain static when the world is not.
Some organisations are already using technology to trigger materiality reviews when new regulations emerge, when incidents occur in the value chain, or when strategy changes. Materiality is becoming a management input, not just a reporting output.
This is a foundational change. It turns materiality from an obligation into an early-warning system.
Climate risk hits earnings before it hits targets
Climate change is no longer a long-term abstraction. It is increasingly a near-term financial reality.
Energy price volatility, transition costs, physical climate impacts, asset impairment, and insurance availability are already affecting earnings and balance sheets. In many cases, these impacts are showing up well before organisations miss climate targets or revise transition plans.
Recent extreme weather events disrupting operations, rising insurance premiums in exposed regions, and sudden shifts in energy markets have made this tangible for boards and executives. Climate risk is no longer something to model in isolation. It needs to be connected directly to financial planning and asset decisions.
Organisations that continue to treat climate risk as a sustainability topic rather than a financial one are likely to underestimate its impact.
Access to markets increasingly depends on sustainability performance
We are entering a phase where sustainability performance directly affects who organisations can do business with.
Carbon border mechanisms, deforestation regulations, supply-chain transparency requirements, and human rights due diligence laws are reshaping global trade. Access to certain markets increasingly depends on emissions data, product traceability, and credible evidence of responsible practices across the value chain.
This is already visible in sectors exposed to the EU market, where suppliers outside Europe are being asked to provide emissions and deforestation data simply to maintain commercial relationships. Similar dynamics are emerging through large customer requirements, even where regulation is still evolving.
Sustainability is becoming a condition of market access, not just a reputational consideration. That has profound implications for procurement, supplier relationships, and trade strategy.
Adaptive ESG becomes the new normal
Taken together, these trends point to a broader shift toward Adaptive ESG.
Adaptive ESG combines continuous intelligence with a full double materiality perspective. It looks at risks, opportunities, dependencies, and impacts together, and it treats volatility as something to learn from rather than merely absorb.
Boards are increasingly focused on continuity, adaptability, and workforce stability alongside decarbonisation ambition. They expect sustainability to support resilience, not compete with it.
The organisations that perform best in this environment are those that design sustainability strategies around transition readiness and operational robustness, rather than static targets alone.
Looking ahead
The question for 2026 is no longer whether sustainability matters. That debate is over.
The real question is whether organisations have built the systems, capabilities, and governance needed to manage sustainability properly in a volatile world.
Those that treat sustainability as infrastructure, integrated, systemised, and adaptive, will be better positioned to comply, compete, and respond to change.
Those that do not will continue to discover that sustainability risks have a habit of becoming business risks, often faster than expected.
References: Tim Siegenbeek van Heukelom, “ESG at the Cutting-Edge: Building Systems that Learn, Adapt, and Benefit from Change”, 20 October 2025, https://www.esgtoday.com/guest-post-esg-at-the-cutting-edge-building-systems-that-learn-adapt-and-benefit-from-change/
Dr. Tim Siegenbeek van Heukelom is Chief Impact Officer at Socialsuite, where he spearheads the development of ESG technology that helps organisations identify, prioritise, and report on their most material sustainability issues. With more than a decade of global sustainability experience and deep ESG expertise in strategy, programs, and reporting, Tim has worked across public, private, and non-profit sectors.
