Great potential in climate communication: Holcim on the right track

Despite clear political guidelines and public pressure, companies often lack transparency and clarity when reporting on climate protection measures. "For internationally renowned companies, this is playing with fire. Against the backdrop of increasing public awareness of climate change and stricter legal measures, companies need to significantly improve their climate communication," says Prof. Dr. Claude Meier, Head of the Center for Research & Methods HWZ and author of the study.

Following the ratification of the Paris Agreement in 2017, the Energy Strategy 2050 and the Climate and Innovation Act adopted at the ballot box in June 2023, Switzerland has introduced far-reaching instruments and incentives to reduce emissions. In addition, mandatory climate reporting came into force in Switzerland on January 1, 2024. These framework conditions require companies to communicate their climate protection efforts effectively and credibly, which has now been examined in detail by the HWZ.

Findings of the HWZ study:

1. Three performance groups: Companies can be divided into three performance groups based on the scores they achieve in terms of their climate communication. In the lowest performance group in particular, there is a high risk of accusations of greenwashing (distorted and embellished presentation of climate protection measures) and greenhushing (withholding relevant information).

1. Deep ratings in social media: The 46 Swiss companies listed and analyzed in the "Swiss Reputation Ranking" generally show poor ratings in their climate communication on social media. Company reports, on the other hand, are usually rated better, but there is also considerable potential for improvement here in some cases.

3. Independence from reputation and corporate form: There is no striking correlation between a company's climate communication and its public reputation according to the "Swiss Reputation Ranking". A company's reputation is therefore fundamentally independent of its climate communication.

Risk profiles Reputational risk:

1. Companies with low reputational risk: Holcim is characterized by exemplary climate communication, both in its sustainability reports and on social media. Other internationally active companies such as Swiss Re, Nestlé, Swisscom and Credit Suisse also demonstrate good approaches, particularly in their sustainability reports. However, they have some catching up to do, especially in social media.

2. Companies with medium reputational risk: Corporations such as Novartis, ABB and Migros show an average to good communication performance in their reports, but also have deficits in social media. These companies need to provide more detailed and frequent information to minimize potential reputational risks.

3. Companies with a high reputational risk: Companies such as Landi, Securitas and Zweifel hardly communicate about their climate protection measures, neither in reports nor on social media. These companies are particularly susceptible to accusations of greenwashing and urgently need to improve their communication strategies.

What needs to happen now?

"The results make it clear that more precise and intensive climate communication is increasingly required. Companies should provide detailed and comprehensive information both in reports and on social media in order to minimize reputational risks and strengthen market-relevant credibility," emphasizes Prof. Dr. Claude Meier.

Holcim demonstrates a high level of communication both in reports and on social media and clearly sets itself apart from other companies. However, according to Claude Meier, with its very high CO2 emissions in its core business, the issue of more climate-friendly production is very much to the fore for Holcim. This also means that Holcim attaches great importance to climate communication. Conversely, other companies may place greater emphasis on other areas of sustainability due to their specific situation (e.g. sourcing raw materials from the global South; animal welfare). Still others already have a good reputation with regard to climate, which is why they do not push climate communication even more intensively (e.g. SBB). However, these reasons and other areas of sustainability were not the subject of this study.

Furthermore, companies such as ABB and Migros show good approaches in their corporate reports, but there is a lack of sufficient and detailed communication on social media. This gap should be closed in order to ensure comprehensive and credible climate communication.

Companies such as Landi and Securitas have an acute need for action and must urgently improve their climate communication in order to avoid reputational risk, particularly with regard to accusations of greenwashing.

This new study by the HWZ makes it clear that effective and credible climate communication is crucial for companies in today's attention economy. Only through more precise and intensive communication can companies meet public and political demands and minimize their reputational risks.

Source: www.fh-hwz.ch