The true meaning behind sustainability performance

During my participation in the Sustainable Investing Research Consulting Project at SIPA, I had the opportunity to engage deeply with the evolving landscape of ESG reporting in the luxury goods sector. My assigned company, Rxxx, provided a fascinating case study that not only deepened my understanding of sustainability disclosure practices but also offered important lessons in stakeholder engagement and research alignment. As one of the most data-complete companies in our study, Rxxx’s reporting allowed me to assess several core environmental indicators, including Scope 1–3 greenhouse gas emissions, waste management, energy sourcing, and water use.

What stood out in this company’s case was its strong correlation between improved ESG reporting and actual sustainability performance, especially in recent years. For instance, the company achieved a 31% reduction in upstream transport emissions by shifting away from air freight, and now sources 97% of its electricity from renewable sources, which demonstrates a tangible impact. Its landfill waste dropped by 61% year-over-year, which is largely driven by improved recycling and composting efforts. These results reflected not only compliance with global ESG frameworks but also a broader internal push for climate accountability.

However, working with this company’s public disclosures also revealed data challenges. Despite third-party assurance and cross-framework alignment, gaps remained: Scope 3 data lacked detail in categories like "use of sold products," and water reuse was not reported. Facility-level data was absent, and many disclosures remained highly aggregated. 

This project forced me to reflect on what “good” sustainability performance really means. Is it enough to report progress if the scope of that reporting is incomplete? Can improvement be claimed if baselines change annually? It became clear to me that ESG reporting is not just a matter of data availability. It is a “function” of corporate intent, internal capabilities, and strategic governance. High-quality disclosure is not only about transparency to external stakeholders; it may also reflect a company's internal ability to see itself clearly and act accordingly.

Beyond the technical work, this project taught me a key professional lesson: the importance of proactive communication with the agent. Despite our team’s deep research, we encountered a situation in which our initial work did not fully align with the agent’s expectations. We had spent lots of hours sourcing datasets and conducting deep individual case studies. But a delayed clarification about the deliverable structure meant that much of our work needed to be restructured, and some of it needed to be entirely revised.

This experience taught me an important lesson: if we fail to stay aligned with the client’s goals and structural preferences, even our diligent research can fall short. In consulting-oriented sustainability work, it’s not only about conducting rigorous analysis, but it’s also about ensuring that the analysis is actionable. As we did in our final deliverables, following the client’s formatting and language preferences ensured that our findings were effectively communicated and practically usable. It reminded me that the success of a project lies in both communication and content.

As someone pursuing a career in sustainable finance and corporate ESG strategy, I walk away from this experience with a clearer understanding of the intersection between data, disclosure and authentic consulting work.  Looking ahead, I am increasingly interested in how digital innovations like blockchain auditing and real-time traceability can bridge the current gaps in reporting accuracy and assurance. In sum, I am grateful for this opportunity to participate in this meaningful real-world consulting project.