Sustainability Atlas
Policy, Standards & Strategy·12 min read··...

Trend analysis: Procurement & supplier engagement — where the value pools are (and who captures them)

Signals to watch, value pools, and how the landscape may shift over the next 12–24 months. Focus on implementation trade-offs, stakeholder incentives, and the hidden bottlenecks.

In 2024, suppliers engaged through structured decarbonization programs reduced a combined 43 million metric tons of CO2—more than Sweden's entire annual emissions—according to CDP's Supply Chain report. Yet despite this headline success, only 13% of companies include climate requirements in supplier contracts, and fewer than 6% require suppliers to disclose climate data (CDP 2024). This asymmetry between ambition and execution defines the procurement sustainability landscape in 2025: organizations recognize that Scope 3 supply chain emissions are 26 times greater than their operational footprint, but the mechanisms to systematically capture value from supplier engagement remain unevenly distributed. The companies that crack this code—through integrated data infrastructure, contractual innovation, and strategic supplier collaboration—are positioning themselves to capture disproportionate returns in both risk mitigation and revenue growth.

Why It Matters

Procurement and supplier engagement sit at the nexus of corporate sustainability strategy and operational reality. For most organizations, 70-90% of their environmental footprint originates in the supply chain, making supplier decarbonization not a peripheral concern but the primary lever for credible climate action. The EcoVadis 2024 Sustainable Procurement Barometer found that 70% of companies now cite "delivering on corporate sustainability goals" as a top procurement driver, yet only 28% have integrated emissions targets into their procurement plans (EcoVadis 2024).

The regulatory environment has shifted decisively. The EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), and Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) collectively mandate supply chain transparency at unprecedented depth. Companies failing to demonstrate value chain emissions management face not only regulatory penalties but increasingly, exclusion from major procurement relationships. Walmart, Unilever, and other anchor buyers now routinely include ESG thresholds in RFPs, with 92% of major buyers expected to require ESG disclosures from suppliers as of 2024 (BDC 2024).

The financial stakes are substantial. CDP identifies $165 billion in potential financial benefits from supply chain emissions reductions, while the cost of inaction is nearly three times higher than mitigation measures. Companies with high ESG integration in procurement are 3-4 times more likely to have C-suite engagement, creating a virtuous cycle where sustainability performance drives executive attention, resource allocation, and competitive positioning.

Key Concepts

Understanding the procurement-sustainability value chain requires parsing several interrelated frameworks that determine where value accumulates and who captures it.

Scope 3 Materiality Thresholds: The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) requires companies to set Scope 3 reduction targets when supply chain emissions exceed 40% of their total footprint. For most manufacturers, retailers, and consumer goods companies, this threshold is easily surpassed. The practical implication: credible net-zero commitments are impossible without structured supplier engagement programs.

Supplier Engagement Maturity Levels: CDP's Supplier Engagement Assessment distinguishes between passive disclosure requests (56% of companies include sustainability in contract terms) and active collaboration (45% work with suppliers on improvement strategies). The value gap between these approaches is significant: companies offering financial incentives see suppliers 52% more likely to achieve emissions reductions compared to those providing training alone.

N-Tier Visibility: Most organizations have visibility into only half of their Tier-1 suppliers, with dramatically less insight into Tier-2 and Tier-3 relationships where significant sustainability risks—forced labor, deforestation, emissions hotspots—often concentrate. The 49% of companies now using supplier engagement platforms and 57% adopting risk-mapping tools represent the leading edge of capability development.

Value Pool Concentration: The procurement sustainability market divides into three value pools: (1) data infrastructure and platforms, (2) consulting and implementation services, and (3) financial products linking sustainability performance to cost of capital. Each pool has distinct economics, competitive dynamics, and capture mechanisms.

What's Working

Data-Driven Supplier Prioritization

Leading organizations systematically rank suppliers by spend and emissions contribution, focusing engagement resources where impact is highest. Telstra's approach—prioritizing suppliers by procurement spend and emissions, modeling selection criteria on industry peers, and increasing engagement annually—demonstrates how systematic targeting amplifies program effectiveness without proportional resource increases (CDP Supply Chain 2024).

Financial Incentives Tied to Performance

Walmart's Project Gigaton, integrated with sustainable supply chain finance, exemplifies how linking decarbonization to supplier financing terms creates aligned incentives. Suppliers achieving emissions reductions gain access to favorable financing, while Walmart advances its Scope 3 targets. This structure is particularly effective because it addresses the capital constraints that often prevent suppliers—especially SMEs—from investing in sustainability improvements.

Platform-Enabled Standardization

The proliferation of platforms like EcoVadis (covering 220 industries in 180 countries), CDP Supply Chain (engaging 24,000+ suppliers through 200+ corporate buyers), and IntegrityNext (2M+ suppliers) has reduced friction in sustainability data collection. Standardized assessment frameworks lower the per-supplier engagement cost while enabling cross-company data portability—a supplier assessed by one buyer can share results with others.

Contractual Integration

Cisco requires Tier-1 and Tier-2 suppliers to disclose via CDP, embeds KPIs into supplier management aligned with net-zero goals, and expects third-party verification of Scope 1 and 2 emissions. This contractual architecture transforms sustainability from voluntary commitment to commercial obligation, with clear consequences for non-performance.

What's Not Working

The ESG Data Integration Gap

Despite widespread recognition of sustainability's importance, only 25% of companies have fully integrated ESG data into procurement processes (IntegrityNext 2025). Most organizations maintain parallel systems—procurement platforms for commercial decisions, sustainability tools for reporting—creating friction that prevents real-time incorporation of ESG criteria into sourcing decisions.

Supplier Assessment Fatigue

SME suppliers, particularly those serving multiple large buyers, face cascading assessment requests from EcoVadis, CDP, Sedex, Higg Index, and proprietary questionnaires. The 2024 Barometer identifies "sustainability fatigue" as a significant barrier, with smaller suppliers lacking resources to respond effectively to redundant inquiries. This dynamic inadvertently disadvantages the supplier segment most needing support.

Limited Scope 3 Data Quality

While 70% of companies have Scope 3 targets, only 2.5% of suppliers have Science Based Targets. The gap between buyer ambitions and supplier capabilities creates systematic data quality problems. Many reported Scope 3 figures rely on industry-average emission factors rather than primary supplier data, undermining the precision needed for effective reduction strategies.

Misaligned Incentive Structures

Procurement teams remain predominantly evaluated on cost reduction and supply security, with sustainability metrics layered on rather than integrated. This creates structural tension: a buyer may be rewarded for selecting the lowest-cost supplier even when alternatives offer superior sustainability performance. The shift from "why sustainability?" to "how to implement it" identified in the 2024 Barometer requires corresponding incentive realignment.

Key Players

Established Leaders

EcoVadis: The dominant sustainability ratings platform, covering 130,000+ companies and recognized in the 2024 FrenchTech Next40. Their Carbon Action Manager and IQ Plus risk monitoring tools extend beyond assessment into active management.

CDP: Operating the global disclosure system, CDP's Supply Chain program coordinates $5.5+ trillion in combined buying power. Their Supplier Engagement Assessment evaluates 22,700+ companies, with only 6% achieving 'A' ratings.

SAP: Through Sustainability Footprint Management (SFM) and Ariba integration, SAP embeds carbon data requirements at supplier onboarding, leveraging existing ERP relationships to mainstream sustainability data collection.

Sphera: Enterprise sustainability management spanning 8,400+ customers in 95 countries, with particular strength in EHS&S and supply chain transparency for industrial sectors.

Emerging Startups

CO2 AI: Backed by BCG, CO2 AI offers GenAI-powered carbon footprint calculation specifically optimized for Scope 3 and supplier decarbonization, with CSRD/SEC reporting alignment.

IntegrityNext: Rapid growth to 2M+ suppliers on platform, with AI-driven assessments and ERP integration enabling automated risk alerts and compliance monitoring.

Emitwise (Procurewise): Free supplier tools for primary data collection, verified emissions calculations, and carbon accounting—reducing barriers to supplier participation.

TrusTrace: Combining AI, blockchain, and IoT for end-to-end supply chain visibility, with particular focus on EU CSDDD compliance and forced labor tracking.

Key Investors

Greenoaks: Led Watershed's $100M Series C in February 2024, signaling continued investor appetite for carbon accounting infrastructure.

Just Climate: Backed Ascend Elements ($162M) and other circular economy ventures, focusing on climate solutions with measurable impact.

Climate Investment: Backed by 12 major oil and gas companies, deploying capital into transition technologies including supply chain decarbonization tools.

Sector-Specific KPI Benchmarks

SectorSupplier Disclosure RateEmissions Reduction TargetSBT AdoptionContract ESG Clauses
Consumer Goods75%40-50% by 203015%45%
Automotive68%30-40% by 203022%52%
Technology82%50-60% by 203028%65%
Retail60%35-45% by 203012%38%
Chemicals55%25-35% by 20308%42%
Construction42%20-30% by 20305%25%

Sources: CDP Supply Chain 2024, EcoVadis Barometer 2024, Together for Sustainability

Examples

Unilever: Integrated Value Chain Transformation

Unilever engages 75% of suppliers by spend through CDP Supply Chain, with their Clean Future program reformulating products using renewable ingredients sourced from engaged suppliers. The integration of supplier emissions data with product development creates a feedback loop where sustainability requirements drive innovation. Unilever's approach demonstrates how procurement sustainability can extend beyond risk management into competitive differentiation, with reformulated products commanding premium positioning in environmentally conscious markets.

Nestlé: Scale Through Standardization

Nestlé requires supplier engagement representing 70% of emissions by 2024, utilizing EcoVadis, CDP, and Together for Sustainability (TfS) platforms to standardize assessment across their 150,000+ supplier base. By leveraging industry consortia rather than proprietary systems, Nestlé reduces per-supplier engagement costs while contributing to ecosystem-wide data infrastructure. Their approach illustrates how anchor buyers can shape market standards, creating positive externalities that benefit smaller purchasers operating in the same supply networks.

Cisco: Contractual Precision

Cisco's requirement for Tier-1 and Tier-2 CDP disclosure, KPI integration into supplier management, and third-party verification mandate represents the most contractually rigorous approach among major technology companies. Their framework embeds sustainability into commercial relationships with explicit performance expectations and consequences. The Cisco model demonstrates how procurement contracts can function as governance mechanisms, translating corporate sustainability commitments into binding supplier obligations with measurable accountability.

Action Checklist

  • Conduct Scope 3 materiality assessment: Map supplier emissions contribution by category and identify the 20% of suppliers representing 80% of impact
  • Select standardized assessment platform: Choose CDP, EcoVadis, or sector-specific tool (TfS for chemicals, Higg for apparel) to minimize supplier burden
  • Integrate ESG data into procurement workflow: Embed sustainability scores in supplier selection, performance reviews, and contract renewals—not as separate reporting
  • Establish tiered engagement program: Differentiate between disclosure requirements (broad), improvement collaboration (high-impact suppliers), and financial incentives (strategic partners)
  • Align procurement incentives: Modify buyer KPIs to include sustainability performance alongside cost and delivery metrics
  • Implement contract clauses: Require emissions disclosure, improvement targets, and audit rights in supplier agreements
  • Build internal capability: Train procurement teams on sustainability assessment interpretation and supplier engagement techniques
  • Monitor regulatory evolution: Track EU CSDDD, CBAM, and CSRD implementation timelines and adjust supplier requirements accordingly

FAQ

Q: How do we prioritize which suppliers to engage first when resources are limited? A: Start with a 2x2 matrix plotting suppliers by (1) emissions contribution and (2) strategic importance/spend. High-emissions, high-strategic-importance suppliers warrant intensive engagement including joint decarbonization planning and financial incentives. High-emissions, lower-importance suppliers may be candidates for phase-out or substitution. The CDP framework recommends targeting suppliers representing 70% of emissions by 2024-2025 as a reasonable ambition level.

Q: What's the business case for sustainable procurement investment when ROI is uncertain? A: The 2024 EcoVadis Barometer documents 8-20% cost savings across waste, energy, and supply chain costs for mature programs. Additionally, 60% of directors and VPs report that supply chain sustainability helps win or retain customers. Enterprise valuations show 6-7% premiums for companies with strong sustainability performance. The challenge is building measurement systems that attribute these benefits to specific procurement investments.

Q: How do we handle suppliers who refuse to disclose or lack capability to measure emissions? A: Segment non-disclosing suppliers into "unwilling" and "unable" categories. For unable suppliers, consider providing tools (Emitwise offers free supplier modules) or training. For unwilling suppliers, clarify commercial consequences while offering transition periods. Progressive buyers are shifting from "request" to "require" disclosure, with contractual consequences for non-compliance. Industry-average emission factors can serve as temporary proxies, applied with conservative assumptions.

Q: Should we use industry consortia platforms or build proprietary supplier engagement programs? A: Consortia platforms (CDP Supply Chain, TfS, Higg) offer lower per-supplier costs, reduced assessment fatigue, and data portability. Proprietary programs offer customization and competitive differentiation but impose higher costs on suppliers and the organization. Most leading companies use hybrid approaches: standardized platforms for baseline assessment, proprietary programs for strategic supplier collaboration. The trend favors standardization, with proprietary elements reserved for innovation partnerships.

Q: How do emerging EU regulations change supplier engagement requirements? A: CSDDD requires due diligence across the value chain including suppliers' suppliers. CBAM imposes carbon costs on imported goods, requiring embedded emissions data. CSRD mandates disclosure of value chain emissions with increasing granularity. Together, these regulations transform supplier engagement from voluntary best practice to legal compliance requirement. Organizations should map current capabilities against 2025-2027 regulatory timelines and identify gaps requiring immediate action.

Sources

Topics

procurementsupplierEPRunit economicsriskstandardsISSB

Related Articles