STATE OF PROGRESS:
BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO
THE SDGS
A 2020-2021 study in support of the
Sustainable Development Goals
Developed by:

Supported by:

STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGS

Foreword

3

Background4

Research Methodology

6

Summary of Findings

9

Reporting Trends

10

Plans

10

Commitments

11

Actions

12

Progress

13

Suppliers

14

Which Goals Have the Greatest Support?

15

SDG Rating Performance

16

Breakdown by Negative Impacts

18

Breakdown by SDG Targets

18

Breakdown By Industry, Geography and Company Turnover19

By Industry

19

By Geography

22

By Company Turnover24

SDG Priorities

25

Conclusion

26

Recommendations

28

Research Team

29

Sources and Notes

30

2Foreword
Written by: Peter Paul van de Wijs,
Chief External Affairs Officer, GRI.
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were established by the United Nations as the ambitious roadmap
towards a sustainable future for all. While they were adopted by member states, the success of the SDGs hinges
on the ability to engage the private sector to unleash their innovative power.
From the inception of the SDGs, GRI has highlighted the importance of the private sector’s contributions toachieving the 2030 Agenda and, provided guidance for businesses on how to integrate reporting on the SDGs
into their reporting process. It is clear that by embedding the SDGs within corporate disclosures, businesses
can change their ways of working through embracing sustainable strategies and practices.
Reporting frameworks, such as the GRI Standards, help the private sector make progress towards the 2030
Agenda by:
1.

Kick-starting companies’ understanding of their SDGs contributions;

2.

Providing global guidance as a common approach to achieving the 2030 Agenda;

3.

Helping companies identify performance and business gaps as opportunities to improve, 				collaborate, innovate and gain business advantage;

4.

Easing data comparability with other companies;5.

Helping companies establish a link between the SDGs performance and 						business performance¹.

This research seeks to clarify how a sample of GRI reporters are disclosing information on the SDGs, highlighting
current trends in the SDGs reporting, and providing recommendations on how to strengthen the SDGs
communication and performance.
We would like to thank Support the Goals, an initiative led by volunteer researchers who rate businesses basedon the level of their support for the SDGs.

¹Driving Corporate Action Towards Accomplishing the SDGs,
p.10: https://globescan.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Driving_Corporate_Action_Towards_Accomplishing_the_SDGs_publication.pdf

3STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGS

Background
GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) is the independent,
international organization that helps businesses andother organizations take responsibility for their impacts
by providing them with the global common language tocommunicate those impacts. GRI provides the world’s
most widely used standards for sustainability reporting– the GRI Standards.
The GRI secretariat is headquartered in Amsterdam,
the Netherlands, with a network of seven regional hubsthat ensures that we can support organizations andstakeholders worldwide.
GRI continuously puts a spotlight on the impacts andthe contributions of the private sector to the SDGs.
It mainly does so by providing reporting tools on the
SDGs for the private sector, hosting corporate programs
to facilitate thought leadership on business reportingon the SDGs (Corporate Action Group for Reporting on
the SDGs and Business Leadership Forum on Corporate
Reporting as a Driver to Achieving the SDGs), and bypromoting multi-stakeholder partnerships to facilitate
the inclusion of the private sector’s impacts in the
Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs).
As part of this work, GRI, in collaboration with the
UN Global Compact (UNGC) and other partners, hasdeveloped the following resources for companies:•

Analysis of the goals and targets•

Integrating the SDGs into corporate reporting:A practical guide•In focus: Addressing investor needs in business
reporting on the SDGs

4

GRI has commissioned Support the Goals to carry out
this study, which highlights current trends in the SDGs
reporting, and provides recommendations on how tostrengthen SDGs communication and performance.
Support the Goals is an initiative that promotes andencourages business support of the UN Global Goals,
composed of volunteer researchers who rate thebusiness community based on their support of theSDGs.
One of the key ambitions of the initiative is to raiseawareness of the Global Goals in the business
community, as well as to promote a structured approachto planning, target setting and reporting on the SDGs.
The rating system used by Support the Goals analyses
which businesses have put in place specific plans andcommitments in relation to the SDGs, as well as thosebusinesses that are making concrete actions towards
their achievement and reporting on their progress. It
also looks at businesses that encourage their suppliers
to get involved, which is a fundamental step in raisingawareness of the SDGs at scale. By building positive
publicity, encouraging a race-to-the-top and promoting
the scaling of activities across supply chains, the StG
aims to engage as many companies as it can. In doingso, it is creating the world’s largest research databasethat tracks business support of the SDGs, encouraging
companies to get involved.
The key objectives of Support the Goals are to:•Raise awareness of the SDGs in the business
community•

Promote a structured approach to planning, target
setting, and reporting with respect to the SDGs•

Provide opportunities for young people to gain
work experience in corporate sustainability sothey can better understand how businesses cancontribute to a better world

5

STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGS

Research 							Methodology
This report presents an analysis andevaluation of how a sample of 206
GRI reporters publicly communicate
their support and actions inrelation to the SDGs, based on
published sustainability reports andinformation from their websites.
The researchers have a diverse
and wide range of academic
backgrounds, including, but notlimited to geography, politics,
international relations andenvironmental science. The researchis peer-reviewed and discussed withthe team members according toestablished guidelines, which are
regularly kept up-to-date.

The research team used fiveevaluation criteria to measure thereporters’ engagement with theSDGs. Each company was awarded
either a green, amber or a redcolor rating for their support of theSDGs as seen in their sustainability
planning, commitments andprogress made, actions taken as
well as the involvement of suppliers.
Companies are rated against fivecategories: Plans, Commitments,
Actions, Progress and Suppliers.
For each category, a traffic lightsystem is applied to reward
a company based on theachievements. A green rating in any
given category equals to one star, so
five stars mean that a green rating
has been given in all five criteria.

To ensure objectivity in
our rating system, we
have carefully created thefollowing guidelines thatreflect the criteria whenassessing the level ofengagement.
Below is a breakdown of
the traffic light system ofachievements for eachcategory.

Plans

A company that makes no statement with regard to social responsibility or corporate social
responsibility, and does not reference the SDGs, is awarded a red rating. An example of apublic statement that would receive a red rating is a phrase like ‘we respect human rights,
promote inclusion and champion diversity’.

A company that indicates overall support of the SDGs but does not mention or prioritize any
specific SDG is awarded an amber rating. A statement such as ‘we support the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals’ is an example.

A company that makes a statement on the SDGs it prioritizes is awarded a green rating.
A phrase such as ‘we support the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and weprioritize SDGs 1, 2 and 3’ illustrates that.

The word ‘plans’ refers to the statements of support for the SDGs made by a company.

6

Commitments

A company that mentions no measurable targets relating to the SDGs receives a red rating.

A company that includes measurable data alongside environmental and/or social
commitments that tackle issues that indirectly support the Goals is awarded an amber
rating, even if there is no explicit mention of the SDGs. A statement that illustrates this is ‘wecommit to reducing our carbon emissions by 50% by 2022’.

A company that mentions measurable targets that are explicitly aligned with any given Goal
receives a green rating. An example of this is a statement such as ‘we commit to ensuring
equal gender representation across our Board of Directors by 2022, in line with our supportof SDG5: Gender Equality”.

The word ‘commitments’ refers to the setting of measurable targets aligned to the SDGs.

Actions

A company that has no evidence of taking action to tackle environmental and/or social
issues receives a red rating.

A company that provides evidence of actions taken but does not align them with the SDGs isawarded an amber rating. An example of this could be a report on the gender breakdown of
the employees without any references made to the SDGs.

A company that provides evidence of the actions taken and explicitly links that to theirsupport of any given SDG receives a green rating. A statement such as ‘we have changed
the way we recycle in our workplace in support of SDG12: Responsible Consumption and
Production’ illustrates that.

The word ‘actions’ refers to the activities being undertaken by a company
to contribute towards the advancement of the SDGs.

7

STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGS

Progress

A company that states no measurable progress in its support of the SDGs would be awarded
a red rating.

A company that provides measurable progress in tackling environmental and/or social issues,
but does not explicitly link this to an SDG, would receive an amber rating. A statement such as‘In 2020/2021, we have reduced our emissions by 50%’ is an example.

A company that mentions measurable progress that is aligned to an SDG would receive agreen rating. The following statement illustrates this clearly: ‘In 2020/2021, we have reduced
our emissions by 50% in support of SDG13: Climate Action”.

The word ‘progress’ refers to the publication of data that reflects the achievementof the social and environmental targets set.

Suppliers

A company that makes no mention of how they work with their suppliers to support the SDGs
receives a red rating.

A company that does mention its suppliers and the way it works with them to tackle
environmental and/or social issues is awarded an amber rating. An example of this is acompany that addresses modern slavery.

A company that openly talks about the people involved in the supply chain and how it
actively engages them in supporting the SDGs receives a green rating. A statement that
represents this is: ‘Our Supplier Code of Conduct is aligned with the SDGs to help educate
suppliers about the Goals”.

The word ‘suppliers’ refers to the way a company involves organizations in its supply
chain in the achievement of the SDGs.

8

Summary of Findings
The research found that the SDGs that are given the greatest and least priority from businesses reflect a wider
trend supported by research conducted by PwC and KPMG.
The SDGs that are prioritized reflect a strong understanding of economic growth, working conditions, themovement towards more responsible consumption and production, as well as the importance of climate action.
Given the alignment of these SDGs with business priorities, this is not surprising. Nor is the fact that the least
prioritized SDGs are concerned with human and marine activities, which many businesses may struggle to findas relevant.
Most businesses researched seem to have a good understanding of the goals, including identifying the ones which
are most relevant to their business. However, the majority of businesses have yet to set targets that are explicitlyaligned to the SDGs. This indicates a disconnection between the global aims of the SDGs and the individual aimsof the businesses.

Number of companies stating
their support of the Goals

The vast majority of businesses in the researchgroup are stating their support of the Goals.

83%

This is significant as the companies in this study
recognize the value of aligning their sustainability
plans with the SDGs.
The most common Goals supported bycompanies mirror the priorities of previous

3 most common Goals:

research conducted by Support the Goals, andare SDGs 8,12,13.
Goal 2: Zero Hunger is consistently the least
reported across research conducted by Support

3 least common Goals:

the Goals. However, the support for SDGs 1
and 14 varies among research, and they are notalways within the 3 least common Goals.

Companies that state which Goals
are most relevant to their businessCompanies that make measurable
commitments to the Goals

The majority of the research group has taken

69%

time to understand which goals are most relevantto their business.
Nearly half of the assessed businesses make40%

measurable commitments towards the SDGs.
While there is room for improvement, this is apromising figure.

² The Time has Come, p49, https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2020/11/the-time-has-come.pdf.
³ Navigating the SDGs: A business guide to engaging with the UN Global Goals, 								https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/sustainability/publications/PwC-sdg-guide.pdf.
4 How are the UK’s Biggest Companies Supporting the UN Global Goals?, Support the Goals 2020 Report, Available to Support the Goals 		
members at https://supportthegoals.org/join/.

9STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGS

Reporting Trends

Plans

143 companies have been awarded a star for their statement of support for the SDGs, andfor mentioning which Goals they prioritize. This is a significant proportion of the companies
researched, with 69.4% achieving the highest rating.
27 of 206 companies (13.1%) were awarded an amber rating for expressing general support of
the SDGs. While these companies have expressed general support for the Goals, they have been
awarded amber ratings because they have not been clear about which SDGs are most relevant totheir business.
In 2020, just 36 out of 206 businesses analyzed in this report were awarded red ratings for nothaving expressed any support statements for the SDGs – this is only 17.5% of the researchsampleRed rating

17.5%

Amber rating

13.1%

Star Awarded (Green)

69.4%

10

Commitments

A large percentage of companies researched have achieved a star for explicitly linking
measurable commitments to the SDGs. A total of 83 companies were awarded a star, which
results in 40.3% of 206 companies directly committing to the SDGs. This is very positive as it
shows that not only are the researched companies recognizing the importance of aligning theirsustainability strategy with the SDGs, but they are also creating measurable targets to truly havean impact.
Based on their commitments, 74 companies were given amber ratings. This equals to
35.9%, indicating measurable commitments being made by businesses to tackle social andenvironmental issues that indirectly support the SDGs.
49 out of 206 businesses were given red ratings for not having outlined any specific andmeasurable commitments to the SDGs. Red-rated companies made up the lowest percentage ofthe research group, with only 23.8% indicating no commitments whatsoever to the Global Goals.

Red rating

23.8%
Amber rating

35.9%

Star Awarded (Green)

40.3%

11

STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGS

Actions

A total of 61.2% of those researched were awarded a star for showing how their actions support
the SDGs. 126 companies were given a star for having outlined and taken concrete actions totackle social and environmental issues, aligning those with a particular Goal.
62 out of 206 companies researched (or 30.1%) achieved an amber rating for publishingevidence of actions being taken to tackle both social and environmental issues, but not aligningthem with a specific SDG.
A very small segment of the research sample was given a red rating for not having evidenced
any actions in support of the SDGs. Only 18 companies, or 8.7%, were given this rating.

Red rating

30.1%

Amber rating

8.7%

Star Awarded (Green)

61.2%

12

Progress

42 companies were awarded a star for their progress in support of the Goals. In 2020, 20.4%of the 206 companies reported their positive impacts by evidencing measurable data of theiractions, explicitly aligning them to a specific SDG.
34.0% of companies researched achieved an amber rating for progress made towards achieving
the Goals. A large number of companies researched - 70 out of 206 - evidenced measurable
data, which suggests progress as well as actions taken to tackle social and environmental
issues, but without an explicit link to any given SDG.
94 companies – or 45.6% - were given a red rating for their progress.

Star Awarded (Green)

20.4%

Amber rating

34.0%

Red rating

45.6%

13

STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGS

Suppliers

Only one of the companies in the research group has achieved a star for having encouraged
their suppliers to explicitly support the Goals. 157 companies were awarded an amber rating,which indicates that the vast majority (76.2%) are working with their suppliers to addressenvironmental and social issues. 48 companies – or 23.3% - were given red ratings for nothaving demonstrated or mentioned how and if their suppliers are supporting the Goals.

Red rating

23.3%

Amber rating

76.2%

14

Star Awarded (Green)

0.5%

Which Goals Havethe Greatest Support?
Although the relevance of the SDGs to businesses is varied, research indicates that Goals 8,12,13 have the greatest
support. These three goals were prioritized by the sample businesses twice as often – or more – compared to other
SDGs. These findings are in line with other research on the SDGs, such as KPMG’s ‘The time has come’ report.5

Decent Work And Economic Growth
Goal 8 was featured 154 times in either companies’ plans or commitments.
Approximately 75% of researched companies align their plans with Goal 8.
This may be explained by the economic growth being the primary focus ofbusinesses along with HR practices of many businesses, e.g. health and safety,
diversity and a minimum wage in the workplace.

Responsible Consumption And Production
The research found that Goal 12 was strongly supported by the sample
businesses. It was mentioned close to 100 times as the most relevant goal forthese businesses, with approximately 50 making measurable commitmentsthat are explicitly aligned with this SDG.
Within Goal 12, target 12.6 encourages large and transnational companies
to adopt sustainable practices and integrate sustainability information into
their reporting cycle (IISD 2020). An indicator of 12.6 specifically refers
to companies that are valued at $1 billion. In the research sample, thosecompanies valued between $1bn-$50bn account for a larger proportion of thestars awarded.
It is worthy of note that there was a strong correlation between businesses
highlighting the importance of SDG12.6 in their report and those that achieved
a high rating of four or five stars.

Climate Action
With over 85% of the researched businesses showing plans and commitments
for Climate Action, Goal 13 has the highest support than any other SDG.

5 Ibid p 49.

15

STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGSSDG Rating
Performance
Out of 206 companies researched, 0.5% achieved fivestars - representing the minority of organizations rated.
On the other end of the spectrum, 29.6% - more thana quarter - were awarded zero stars. Despite the data
indicating a lack of support for the Goals, the vast
proportion of companies researched - 34.9% - achieved
four stars, showing that several companies are one staraway from optimally communicating the alignment of
the SDGs in their corporate strategy.

Scoring four stars reflects taking progressive
steps towards the 2030 Goals. It indicates that anorganization is doing four of the following:1.

Stating that they support the SDGs in their plans.

2.

Publishing measurable targets, linking them tospecific Goals.

3.

Describing the actions they are taking towards
achieving them.

4.

Giving evidence of sustainability progress innumerical, quantitative data.

5.

Encouraging their suppliers to support the SDGs.

Ratings of businesses researched
0 Stars

29.6%

1 Stars

7.3%
2 Stars

13.6%
5 Stars

0.5%
4 Stars

34.9%
16

3 Stars

14.1%

5 Stars
The research indicates that many organizations are not educating their suppliers on the importance of the SDGs.
With awareness of the goals being generally low, this is both an issue and an opportunity for rapid improvement.
Only one business achieved this result in the research sample.

4 Stars
The largest group of companies (34.9%) achieved four stars, meeting almost all of the criteria. In most cases,
educating suppliers about the SDGs - the fifth criteria - is the only omission that prevents organizations fromgaining all of the stars. However, the achievement of four stars indicates that these companies are not only
aware of the Goals, but they are aligning and committing to them in their business practices.

17

STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGS

Breakdown by
Negative Impacts
While it is important for businesses to share how
they are positively contributing to the SDGs, it is also
important to understand how they may have a negative
impact on the Goals.

Only 13 of businesses researched - or 6.3% of
206 businesses in total - reported that their current
operations may have a negative impact on one or moreof the SDGs.

Does the research sample report their negative impacts towards the SDGs?
Yes

6.3%

No

93.7%

Breakdown by
SDG Targets
Although the 17 SDGs have high-level objectives, they
are supported by 169 targets. Businesses should taketime to understand these targets and identify how theirefforts contribute to these, as doing this will provide
greater focus. 12.1% of businesses researched - 25
out of 206 - stated how their commitments relate to a
specific target.

18

This is a key area for improvement on reporting, as
mentioning specific SDG targets helps companies act
on them and progress with their commitments. This isvital for the overall progress and the achievement of
the goals.

Breakdown By Industry, Geography		and Company Turnover
By Industry:
The businesses analyzed in this report have been grouped by industry, with the findings demonstrated in the graphbelow. It has been previously noted that 34.9% of 206 businesses rated in this study achieved 4 stars. Dividing
these businesses by industry further reveals the distribution of stars awarded, demonstrated in the graph below.
The Non-Profit and Commercial Service were below average in their communication of the SDGs. However, theresults were far better in other industries

5 Star
4 Star
3 StarStar Distribution by Industry

2 Star
1 Star0 Star30
20

Water Utilities

Tourism/LeisureTobaccoTextiles and Apparel

Telecommunications

Technology Hardware

Retailers

Real Estate

Rail Road

Public Agency

Other

Non-Profit / Services

Mining

Metals Products

Logistics

Household and Personal Products

Healthcare Services

Healthcare Products

Forest and Paper Products

Food and Beverage Products

Financial Services

Equipment

Energy Utilities

EnergyConstruction Materials

Construction

Conglomerates

Computers

Commercial Services

Chemicals

Aviation

Automotive

10

Figure 1 for Star Distribution by Industry
19

STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGSPlans
The majority of companies researched have included a plan to support the SDGs in their reporting, including
details of the goals they have identified as priorities for their business. A star for plans towards the SDGs has been
awarded for businesses across at least 16 different industries.
One third of businesses rated in the Commercial Services industry did not identify the relevant SDGs to theirbusiness. Similarly, 37.5% of businesses rated in the Non-Profit sector, and 66% of the businesses rated in the
Logistics sector, did not identify the goals which they could impact the most. These industries have an opportunity
for improvement as they can begin to align their reporting with the SDGs.

Commitments
Over half of the businesses researched have published social and environmental targets, with 40.3% of these
explicitly making measurable commitments to support the SDGs. In this context this criterion is of particularsignificance as it is important that businesses not only set social and environmental targets, but also align thesewith the SDGs.
100% of companies in the Aviation, Railroad, Technology Hardware, and Tobacco industries received a star forhaving measurable commitments to explicitly support one or more SDGs. A star was also awarded for this criteria
to 80% of Energy Utilities companies, 75% of companies in both the Telecommunications and Textiles & Apparelindustries, and 71.4% of Conglomerates, Chemicals, Healthcare Products, and Mining companies.
Industries that performed less well against this criterion included those in the Non-Profit / Services and ‘Other’industries, with 62.5% and 54.5% of these receiving red ratings respectively, indicating that no environmental and/or
social targets were published.

Actions
Reporting how their positive actions contribute to the SDGs is an important step for businesses. By understanding
and reporting this information, they demonstrate that their actions have positive consequences, which are linked to
the global goals.
Out of 32 industries researched in the report, companies belonging to 26 of these were given either amber or green
rating, with only six industries containing companies which were rated red for not publishing any actions in supportof environmental social governance.
From 26 industries with companies receiving an amber or green rating, there were eight that had companies
achieve a star for publishing actions that aligned to the SDGs. These industries were Aviation, Chemicals,
Computers, Construction, Equipment, Metals Products, Railroad, Retailers and Telecommunications.

20

Progress
75% of industries researched in this report had companies that were rated amber or higher, meaning thatbusinesses in 24 industries published progress on their environmental and social actions.
100% of companies within the following industries received a star for reporting progress on their contribution
to the SDGs : Aviation, Equipment, Railroad, Retailers and Water Utilities. The Textiles and Apparel and Mining
industries also performed well, with 75% and 71.4% receiving a star respectively.
25% of industries researched saw companies receive a red rating for their reporting efforts and progress made,but the proportion within each industry was relatively low. Only four industries saw more than 25% of companies
receive a red rating.

Suppliers
Awareness of the SDGs is worryingly low in most geographies, particularly amongst smaller businesses. This
criterion analyzes which businesses are reporting on their efforts to educate suppliers about the Goals. Amberratings are given for those that, while not sharing their efforts to educate suppliers on the SDGs, are at least
reporting their discussions with suppliers on environmental and social issues
Industries that did particularly well in this criterion were Chemicals and Other, as they were the only ones that saw
companies receive a star in this category. The percentages were 14.2% and 4.5%, respectively.

21

STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGS

By Geography:
Star Distribution by Continent

5 Star
4 Star
3 Star75

2 Star
1 Star0 Star50
250EuropeAsia

North
America

Oceania

AfricaSouth
America

For this analysis, companies were organized by the continent where they are registered.

Asia:

Europe:Asia is the leading continent for the number of stars
awarded to businesses. The average number ofstars stands at 2.2 and is made up of 40 registeredcompanies that are located in 17 countries. Companies
with the highest ratings are in Bahrain and Pakistan, andthe lowest-rated companies are in Japan, South Korea
and Vietnam.

The European average number of stars was 2.1, ranging
from four to zero. Countries with the highest star
numbers are Norway and Russia. The lowest number(an average of 0) is seen in Austria, Denmark, Georgia
and Slovenia. Europe had the largest data set of 19
countries and 86 companies.

North America:
North America was represented by 39 companies
across the USA and Canada. Canada scored higher thanthe USA, with an average of 4 stars against 2.02. At thecontinental level, North America’s average stands at
2.13 - just 0.01 stars lower than the global average.

South America:
In this analysis, South America was represented by 11
companies across five countries. The average numberof stars received is 2.18, which is slightly higher thanthat of Europe. Companies registered in Brazil did
particularly well, all achieving four stars. Only threecompanies researched were awarded zero stars.
22

Africa:
The analysis of the African continent comprises 13
companies across five countries. The average numberof stars is 2.08. When looking at the average number foreach country, the range was 1.5-3, with those respective
figures being achieved by South Africa and Kenya.

Oceania:
Oceania was represented by seven companies, all ofwhich are registered in Australia. The average numberof stars was 1.71, the lowest achieved. Despite this, fourout of seven companies received two or more stars.
This indicates positive signs of incorporating the SDGs.

By Company Turnover:Number of Companies with Each Star

Proportion of Stars in Each Turnover Category

5 Star
4 Star
3 Star75

2 Star
1 Star0 Star50
25
0
No Value<100,000<1m

1m - 100m

100m -1bn

1bn - 5bn

>50bn

Turnover (€)
Only two companies analyzed in this study had aturnover of less than €100,000, with these being
awarded a two-star and a zero-star rating.
Among those with a turnover of less than €1 million,
the average star rating was 0.375. While this figure islow, within this group, 14.5% of companies received atwo-star and a four-star rating.
For those with a turnover between €1 million and €100
million, the average star rating was approximately 1.36.
In terms of specific star ratings, one one-star rating, six
two-star ratings, nine three-star ratings and five fourstar ratings were awarded, illustrating that nearly 50%
of companies in this bracket have demonstrated somealignment with the SDGs.
Among the companies researched with a turnover
between €100 million and €1 billion, the average star
rating was approximately 2.29. Approximately 40% inthis group achieved a four-star rating, which is a positive
indication of the SDGs alignment. At the same time,
however, approximately 24% achieved zero stars.

The average star rating among those with a turnover
between €1 billion and €50 billion was very similar tothat of the €100 million - €1 billion bracket, but slightly
higher, standing at about 2.48. As demonstrated by thebar chart above, this collection of companies achieved
the largest proportion of four-star ratings.
Out of all companies analyzed with a turnoverhigher than €50 billion, the average star rating is thehighest compared to all other brackets, standing at
approximately 2.55. While this group was the second
smallest in terms of the number of companies
included, it is promising to see such a high figure, withapproximately half of the companies achieving fourstars. This is encouraging as companies with highturnovers are in a key position to deliver the systemlevel change needed to achieve the SDGs.

23

STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGSSDG Priorities

According to an Ipsos survey conducted in 2019 for the World Economic Forum, members of the public
see the three most important SDGs around the world as Goal 2: Zero Hunger; Goal 6: Clean Water andSanitation; and Goal 3: Good Health and Well-Being.
Interestingly, the scope of this research and others done by Support the Goals identifies Goal 8, 12, 13
as the most prioritized goals by businesses. The top three priority SDGs in the research group are Goal
8: Decent Work and Economic Growth; Goal 12: Responsible Consumption and Production; and Goal 13:
Climate Action.
Public opinion contrasts with companies’ prioritization of the above goals to an extent that one of thelowest priorities for companies in this research, Goal 2, is regarded as a high priority by the public. Equally,
Goal 12 is one of the least important SDGs to the population of the 28 countries surveyed in 2019, yet it is
one of the most common goals reported on in this study.

24

Conclusion“The SDGs are unprecedented in their ambition – but the fundamental
ways that business can contribute remain unchanged.”
António Guterres, Secretary-General, United Nations

The challenges to meet the 2030 Agenda should not
be underestimated, and neither should the role ofbusinesses in meeting this Agenda. While businesses
have been continuously transforming their behavior
towards more responsible and sustainable practices,
the SDGs clearly show the need to redefine whatsustainable priorities are among businesses, and theirvision of the future.
The increasing need for greater transparency on the
SDGs has been accelerated by social movements suchas the Black Lives Matter and the ‘Me Too’ movement,
as well as increased regulatory disclosure requirements.
The research indicates that businesses are starting tointegrate the SDGs into their corporate reporting, withthe majority of these highlighting which goals are most
relevant to their business as well as the actions they’vetaken to support them.
Although many businesses have set targets thatare explicitly aligned with the SDGs, in this research,the majority have not. The overwhelming majority ofbusinesses are also not yet reporting data on progress
towards the SDGs.

Businesses in Asia Pacific demonstrated the highest
level of reporting against the SDGs, particularly thosein Central Asia. These results align with research from
Ipsos Mori which indicated that countries in Europe andSouth-East Asia have lower public awareness of theGoals.
The research also shows that more businesses needto report on how their operations can have a negative
impact on the Goals and highlight how their work
contributes to the individual SDG targets. Without thislevel of detail and understanding, it becomes difficult todraw a clear link between business operations and thedetailed ambition of the goals.
Strong international cooperation is needed now
more than ever to ensure that we recover from the
COVID-19 pandemic and achieve the SDGs. The global
community and businesses alike play a vital role in therecovery, and the 2030 Agenda provides an action plan
they require to create a more equitable and sustainable
post-Covid world.

It is also clear that the largest businesses appear tohave more developed reporting against the SDGs.
Whereas this might immediately appear to be becauseof the greater resources available to these companies,
smaller businesses should still be able to demonstrate
their plans, commitments, actions, and progress.

6 Ipsos Mori. (2019). “United Nations Sustainable Development Goals: Global attitudes towards its use and regulation”.

25

STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGS

Recommendations
The following recommendations should be observed to strengthen the use of the SDGs in business sustainability
reporting.

1

Companies should document the process for determining which SDGs they are able to contribute to themost (using the resource Integrating the SDGs into corporate reporting: A practical guide)7. Along with
documenting the process of determining material topics.

2

Company targets to support the SDGs should be stated, with particular consideration for those
SDGs which the company is most able to contribute to through its activities, products, and business
relationships. These company targets should show how they align with the targets of the SDGs.

3

Reporting on positive actions carried out by companies should demonstrate how these are making a
positive impact on the SDGs, indicating a contribution to specific targets.

4

Companies should make easily accessible data on their contribution to the SDGs, aligning these withinternationally recognized frameworks and Standards, such as the GRI Standards.

5

Companies should indicate how they identify, prevent, and address their actual and potential negative
impacts on the SDGs and highlight what these may be. Customers, investors, and governments are
increasingly interested in understanding the negative impacts a business has, and reports with this levelof transparency will lead to a greater trust and accountability as well as an increased ability to understandhow these impacts can be mitigated.

6

Inter- and intra-industry collaboration up and down the value chain should be encouraged so thatcompanies can share practices on reporting towards the SDGs, and use internationally recognizedframeworks and Standards, such as the GRI Sector Standards where appropriate.

7

Companies need to consider their wider value chains to help raise awareness of the SDGs and encourage
clear reporting. Reporting should indicate how suppliers have been engaged on the subject of SDG
reporting, along with other key stakeholders such as data users, investment portfolio companies andcustomers.

7 Integrating the SDGs into Corporate Reporting: A Practical Guide. 								<https://www.globalreporting.org/media/0sxj0ewa/gri_ungc_reporting-on-sdgs_practical_guide.pdf>

26

Involved in the Project
Support the Goals Research Team
Colin Curtis
Founder and Director

Kate Hall
Operations Manager

Rhianon SamuelCommunications
Manager

Rebecca Lockwood
Communications
ManagerOrla Duffey
Corporate Sustainability
Research Team Leader

Sarah Tobin
Operations Manager

Catherine Purkiss
Corporate Sustainability
Research Team Leader

Richard GilbertCorporate Sustainability
Researcher

Ella Heslop
Corporate Sustainability
Researcher

Momina KamranCorporate Sustainability
Researcher

Sarah Miller
Corporate Sustainability
Researcher

Eve Parr
Engagement Manager

Daria Levina
Communications
Specialist - Editorial& ContentPeter Paul van de Wijs
Chief External Affairs
Officer

GRI Project Coordinators
Camila Corradi Bracco
Senior Coordinator
Content Development

Tina Nybo Jensen
Manager International
PolicyAcknowledgment

Disclaimer

GRI greatly appreciates the support by the Government ofThis report has been funded by the Government of Sweden.

Sweden who financed this report through Sida, the Swedish

Responsibility for the content lies entirely with the creator.

International Development Cooperation Agency.

The Government of Sweden does not necessarily share theexpressed views and interpretations.

27

STATE OF PROGRESS: BUSINESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE SDGS

Sources and Notes
Notes

28

Industry

Number of Companies

Automotive

5

Aviation

1

Chemicals

7

Commercial Services

21

Computers3

Conglomerates

7

Construction

2

Construction Materials

4

Energy11

Energy Utilities

5

Equipment

2

Financial Services

34

Food and Beverage Products

9

Forest and Paper Products

1

Healthcare Products

7

Healthcare Services

3

Household and Personal Products

2

Logistics

3

Metals Products

3

Mining7

Non-Profit / Services

16

Other

22

Public Agency

4

Railroad

1

Real Estate

10

Retailers2

Technology Hardware

3

Telecommunications

4

Textiles and Apparel4

Tobacco1

Water Utilities

1Sources1

GRI & ENEL. (2019). “Driving Corporate Action Towards Accomplishing the SDGs”.
[Online]. Available at: <https://globescan.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Driving_Corporate_Action_Towards_			
Accomplishing_the SDGs_publication.pdf>.

2

KPMG. (2020). “The time has come. The KPMG Survey of Sustainability Reporting 2020”.
[Online]. Available at: <https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2020/11/the-time-has-come.pdf>.

3

PWC. (2016). “Navigating the SDGs: A business guide to engaging with the UN Global Goals”.
[Online]. Available at: <https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/sustainability/publications/PwC-sdg-guide.pdf>.

4

Support the Goals. (2020). “How are the UK’s Biggest Companies Supporting the UN Global Goals?”.
[Online]. Available to Support the Goals Members at <https://supportthegoals.org/join>.

6

Ipsos Mori. (2019). “United Nations Sustainable Development Goals: Global attitudes towards its use and regulation”.
[Online]. Available at: <https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2019-09/global_advisor-un_sdgs-		report_-2019-09-06_0.pdf>.

7

GRI & UN Global Compact. (2018). “Integrating the SDGs into Corporate Reporting: A Practical Guide”. Business Reportingon the SDGs. [Online]. Available at: <https://www.globalreporting.org/media/0sxj0ewa/gri_ungc_ reporting-on-sdgs_		practical_guide.pdf>.

Additional:
GRI, UN Global Compact. (2017). “Business reporting on the SDGs, An Analysis of the Goals and Targets”.
[Online]. Available at: <https://www.globalreporting.org/media/v5milwee/gri_ungc_business-reportingon-sdgs_ analysis-ofgoals-and-targets.pdf>.

GRI & UN Global Compact. (2018). “Integrating the SDGs into Corporate Reporting: A Practical Guide”.
Business Reporting on the SDGs. [Online]. Available at: <https://www.globalreporting.org/media/0sxj0ewa/gri_ungc_ reportingon-sdgs_practical_guide.pdf>.

GRI, UN Global Compact. (2018). “In focus: Addressing investor needs in business reporting on the SDGs”.
[Online]. Available at: <https://www.globalreporting.org/media/sphmq4r0/addressing-investor-needssdgs-reporting.pdf>.

United Nations. (2020). “UN Sustainable Development Goals”. [Online]. Available at: <https://sdgs.un.org/goals>.

29

CONTACTTina Nybo Jensen
Manager International Policy
Jensen@globalreporting.org
www.globalreporting.org

www.supportthegoals.org