![](\"https:\/\/fortune.com\/img-assets\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/GettyImages-2189495681-e1765884626700.jpg?w=2048\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
2025 was an extremely difficult year for corporate sustainability, especially in the U.S. <\/p>\n
Core priorities \u2013 from cutting carbon emissions and investing in clean tech to building inclusive workforces \u2013 were under constant attack, much of it from the government. At one point, the administration even tried to stop the construction of a giant offshore wind farm that was 80% done.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Inside companies, sustainability leaders had to keep their heads down. Their departments saw reduced resources and clout, and a handful were shut down. But the biggest story of the year may be that there is <\/em>a story: the sustainability work continued. In the U.S., talking a lot less about sustainability (\u201cgreenhushing\u201d) became the norm. <\/p>\n Still, many adopted some British philosophy: keep calm and carry on \u2026 quietly. But looking only at the U.S. gives a warped picture. While headlines focused on the handful of companies pulling back on sustainability, or on a slowdown in clean tech growth, globally, the story was different. The U.S. is not the world.\u00a0<\/p>\n Part of what kept sustainability on the corporate agenda was the harsh reality of the world\u2019s greatest challenges getting worse. Inequality grew, especially at the very top, where individuals amassed unfathomable wealth (hundreds of billions of dollars) and some corporate valuations hit unreal heights ($4 trillion to $5 trillion).\u00a0<\/p>\n Meanwhile, climate impacts escalated; political winds don\u2019t change actual winds. For example, part of Los Angeles burned to the ground (at an estimated cost of up to $250 billion) during unprecedented wildfires, historic heat baked India, Pakistan, and the EU, and devastating floods in Texas killed dozens of children. Scientists told us that climate change is \u201cbeyond scientific dispute,\u201d at \u201ctipping points,\u201d and \u201cextremely dangerous\u201d (and that the world will blow past the 1.5C warming target). Insurer Allianz issued an eye-popping report that climate change could \u201cdestroy capitalism.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n In addition, the world got less democratic and pulled to the right and generally away from the sustainability agenda, making collective action even harder. This puts more pressure on business. And even facing headwinds, sustainability didn\u2019t die. That\u2019s the top story of the year. Let\u2019s look at that and some other big themes.<\/p>\n Reports of sustainability\u2019s death were loud \u2013Bloomberg Businessweek ran a cover story about it \u2013 but greatly exaggerated. Yes, a few high-profile companies scaled back some goals. But as the year wore on, the big consulting companies looked past one-offs and gathered real data.\u00a0<\/p>\n The results were clear and striking. In an Accenture-UN Global Compact survey, 99 percent of global CEOs said they will maintain or expand sustainability commitments, and nearly 9 in 10 said the business case is stronger today than it was 5 years ago. Yet half admitted that they\u2019re uncomfortable communicating progress \u2013 a perfect demonstration of the conundrum they face. Other data told the same story: more than 80% of companies increased sustainability investments over the past year (Deloitte), expect to boost spending next year (CapGemini), or are already capturing economic gains from decarbonization (BCG). The Sustainable Supply Chain at MIT found, in its report \u201cSustainability Still Matters,\u201d that 85% of companies were maintaining or accelerating sustainable supply chain practices. I\u2019m seeing the same in my work with large companies: the ambition remains, even as the messaging gets muted.<\/p>\n If you only watched the U.S., you\u2019d think clean tech was slowing. But globally, the transition surged. In recent years, nearly all the growth of electricity in the OECD countries has come from renewable energy. But this year, the transition expanded to the developing economies, with enormous growth in solar in India, Pakistan, Poland, and across Africa. In the first half of 2025, global use of coal and gas was actually flat to down, including in India and China (where total emissions fell as well). Globally, renewables passed coal as the world\u2019s largest source of electricity. In addition, electrified vehicles made up 23% of global new car sales in October, even as U.S. sales dropped after the government removed tax incentives.\u00a0<\/p>\n Behind most of the clean tech explosion is China, which now controls over 70 percent of global manufacturing capacity in nearly every clean tech category. They\u2019re not just making stuff; they\u2019re installing it very rapidly. In the first half of 2025, China added more solar than the rest of the world combined; in May alone, it installed more solar than the U.S. added in all of 2023 and 2024. More than half of new passenger car sales in China are electrified, and electrification of heavy trucks is accelerating now as well, creating a drag on diesel demand. The tipping point on the clean economy is in the rear-view mirror.<\/p>\n While the broader sustainability agenda kept moving, some parts didn\u2019t. Companies rushed to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs after the new administration made clear \u2013 with an executive order on day one) \u2013 that it didn\u2019t want DEI in the government supply chain. The government even threatened to block mergers over DEI policies. Some big brands \u2013 Accenture, Disney, Google, Target, and many others \u2013 quickly and publicly distanced themselves from diversity goals. Mentions of \u201cDEI\u201d in Fortune 100<\/em> company reports fell an astounding 98%. But some backlash followed: minority customers boycotted Target, and Disney, McDonald\u2019s, and others faced pushback from employees and consumers. Some B2B buyers, like the city of London, shifted their business away from companies that had retreated. A small, brave handful of companies stood their ground. Apple pushed back on anti-DEI shareholder resolutions, and Cisco issued a simple statement, \u201cour commitment to an enterprise rooted in respect and inclusion is appropriate and necessary.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n The collapse of the Net Zero Banking Alliance \u2013 which only required non-binding long-term pledges \u2013 didn\u2019t bode well. And yet, the central banks raised the alarm about the risk of climate change to the global economy and the European Central Bank said it would include climate change in asset valuations and risk analyses. Some large banks, such as Cr\u00e9dit Agricole and Deutsche Bank, announced major new commitments (hundreds of billions of dollars) to clean tech financing. Global investment in the clean economy is on track to grow to $2.2 trillion this year (double fossil fuel investment), and Millennials and Gen Zers continue to drive demand for sustainable investment options. As they say, follow the money.<\/p>\n Reporting mandates have helped keep sustainability on the agenda, but the rules are under heavy debate. The EU\u2019s \u201cOmnibus\u201d process sought to \u201csimplify\u201d the requirements, and the EU Parliament seemed to agree. The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive\u00a0(CSRD) will likely narrow in scope to cover only companies above \u20ac450 million ($500M+) in revenue (and 1,750 employees). And the due diligence law CSDDD could apply only to those over \u20ac1.5 billion ($1.7B) in revenue (and 5,000 employees). Additional requirements to report on climate risks and plans are partly up in the air, both in the EU and in California. Other legal signals added to the confusion. A German court ruled against Apple\u2019s \u201cCO?-neutral\u201d watch advertising, highlighting the increased policing of environmental claims. And in the U.S., a group of state attorneys general tried to sue asset managers for \u201cmanipulating energy markets\u201d simply by considering climate risk \u2014 a sign of how polarized basic fiduciary practices have become.<\/p>\n The good: AI is undoubtedly improving efficiency and lowering emissions, from buildings to transportation to procurement. It will unlock new breakthroughs in energy, education, and healthcare and disease prevention. The bad: the rising need for energy, and what that means for grids and carbon emissions, are legitimate issues. But the efficiency of tech always rises and some say the energy crunch is overstated. Also, AI initiatives at companies may actually be failing, or execs have little or no idea if the spending is paying off (just imagine if sustainability initiatives had that track record). The ugly: Social risks seem to be rising, including job destruction (it\u2019s hard to build a thriving world with people underemployed) and the replacement of human relationships with code.\u00a0<\/p>\n For me, the biggest unknown is what happens now that anyone can create videos that are nearly indistinguishable from reality. It\u2019s not just about mis- or dis-information, but about crossing a new threshold to not knowing what\u2019s real at all. I have many questions. Like, when there\u2019s no fact base, how do we tackle big shared challenges like climate change or inequality?<\/p>\n This was not a year of corporate courage. Early in the year, some major law firms capitulated to government demands about how they operate and whom they represent\u2026and agreed to give free services to support the government\u2019s agenda. Law firms helping to undermine the rule of law was not a pretty sight (and many lost employees). Some clients like Microsoft, sent a clear market signal that wanted to hire law firms with stronger principles. And some firms stood firm, as did, importantly, some key universities.\u00a0<\/p>\n But the larger trend was accommodation. When the U.S. government strong-armed companies like Intel and US Steel to give up ownership stakes, silence reigned. A business sector that has long rallied \u201cgovernment overreach\u201d stayed quiet, even as the government rounded up citizens and legal immigrants or deployed national guard troops into cities. Instead companies either evaded attention (like avoiding the eye of Sauron in LOTR), or openly courted favor by parading through the White House and giving the president golden baubles. There were a few voices pushing back \u2013 a couple of op-eds from former CEOs or anonymous current ones calling the government\u2019s actions Marxist or Maoist. But it wasn\u2019t much of a resistance. Each company may believe that silence is the safest strategy, but the collective effect is a weakening of institutions that strengthen democracy and <\/em>the economy.<\/p>\n Predicting anything these days is laughably hard, but a few topics will likely rise on the sustainability agenda: growing concern about plastics and health; the limits of greenhushing as a strategy; and the repercussions of AI\u2019s attack on reality, especially as the U.S heads into midterm elections. Misinformation and anti-science hogwash will continue to plague us.\u00a0<\/p>\n This has been a tough year. But the story of sustainability in this era is one of winning and<\/em> losing. The battle to put sustainability on the agenda was won \u2013 which is partly why the backlash has been so intense. And global investment in the clean economy is awe-inspiring and exciting. But our challenges are still growing, and 2026 will bring both devastating weather events (which are now not \u201crecord\u201d but normal) and<\/em> amazing stories of people rising to the occasion. Where we\u2019ll be by early 2027 is anyone\u2019s guess.<\/p>\n The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of\u00a0<\/em>Fortune.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n #Arrow #Button #Icon<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" 2025 was an extremely difficul… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":5707,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[2],"tags":[3816,3817,3818,773],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5706"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5706"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5706\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/5707"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5706"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5706"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/microvibenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5706"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Against all odds, sustainability keeps going<\/strong><\/h2>\n
China leads a global acceleration in the clean economy<\/strong><\/h2>\n
The Anti-ESG movement hits DEI the hardes<\/strong>t<\/h2>\n
The banks send mixed messages<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Regulatory requirements are in flux<\/strong><\/h2>\n
AI\u2019s impact is shaping up to be good, bad, and ugly<\/strong><\/h2>\n
U.S. business leaders say nothing \u2013 or worse<\/strong><\/h2>\n
What to look for in 2026<\/strong><\/h2>\n