Paris, Sep 16: Climate disruption, water stress, resource constraints, and geopolitical volatility are increasing pressure on business operations, supply chains and growth. According to the fifth edition of the Capgemini Research Institute’s A World in Balance: The resilience reset report, organizations are responding by placing greater emphasis on climate adaptation and business resilience[1]. In addition, nearly two-thirds of organizations say they use AI to advance their sustainability agenda. However, the research also reveals a widening gap between ambition and delivery, as more organizations fall behind on net zero commitments and struggle to measure climate- and AI-related impacts.
Sustainability strategies increasingly focus on resilience, business continuity, and access to critical resources Nearly nine in 10 organizations report that climate-related events have disrupted their supply chains. In response, 68% of executives say their organization actively prioritizes climate adaptation, up from 56% in 2025. The way business leaders perceive sustainability is evolving, stretching beyond reporting and compliance and increasingly being seen through the lens of measurable business outcomes, resilience, continuity, and access to critical resources. Nearly two-thirds of executives identify energy- and critical-resource security as a key driver of sustainability investment. More than seven in 10 say that securing access to critical resources – including energy, water, and materials – now has greater influence on sustainability decision-making than emissions-reduction targets.
This transition is also reshaping organizations’ strategic priorities, with more than three-quarters of executives saying their organization is accelerating efforts to integrate energy and resource resilience into business and sustainability strategies. Alongside energy security, water-related risks are a growing concern – 61% of executives believe water scarcity will present a greater constraint on business growth than energy availability over the next five years.
While awareness of these risks is growing, operational readiness remains inconsistent. Just 15% of organizations have fully quantified the financial impact of climate-related disruptions, with just over one in four executives say their organization has assessed climate risks across its extended value chain or deployed climate-risk analytics tools or platforms. Nevertheless, there are signs that adaptation capabilities are maturing – the share of executives who say their organization is underprepared for climate impacts has fallen from 54% in 2025 to 44% in 2026.
“Climate change disruptions have become our new normal, and yet there is still a wide gap between business leaders’ awareness of the risks and actual implementation. In order to protect their supply chains, operations, infrastructure, and access to essential energy, water, and materials, they can no longer defer climate action,” said Cyril Garcia, Global head of Sustainability services and Corporate Responsibility, and Member of the Group Executive Board at Capgemini. “It is encouraging to see organizations prioritize adaptation and resilience for sustainable growth. But as climate and political risks evolve, organizations must continue to embed sustainability into their core business strategy and day-to-day operations.”
Sustainability investments continue to demonstrate a positive ROI
Nearly seven in 10 organizations say their sustainability initiatives have generated a net-positive return on investment. Almost two-thirds of executives (64%) say sustainability investments have boosted sales, up from 47% in 2025, and 74% acknowledge that sustainable practices have enhanced their brand equity.
Looking ahead, 83% say their organization will increase climate adaptation spending over the next 12-18 months, reflecting a trend that is already visible today: organizations spent 1.04% of revenue on sustainability initiatives last year, exceeding the 0.8% they initially allocated. This investment is also helping organizations manage business disruption, as nearly two-thirds of executives from manufacturing or asset-intensive sectors say these investments have improved operational efficiency under supply constraints, while slightly over half say they have enhanced their ability to anticipate and respond to operational and supply-chain disruptions.
Businesses struggle to follow through with their net zero commitments
While most organizations have sustainability goals, the research suggests that implementation remains challenging. In 2026, 84% of organizations say they have set science-based targets, up three points since 2025. Yet only 42% say they are on track to meet their 2030 or interim targets. The execution gap is particularly visible in net zero programs. The number of organizations falling behind on their net zero goals has increased more than tenfold since last year. Moreover, 29% say they have postponed their net zero objectives, compared with just 8% last year.
Nearly two-thirds of organizations acknowledge that aligning sustainability efforts with science-based targets is challenging. Data availability, measurement, and value-chain visibility remain challenging. The proportion of organizations able to measure and collect data across all Scope 3 emissions has fallen to 34%, from 54% in 2025, underscoring the difficulty of tracking and managing emissions beyond direct operations.
AI supports sustainability initiatives, but environmental impact is hard to measure
AI is also increasingly considered as a tool to help turn sustainability ambition into action. Nearly two-thirds of organizations say they use AI to advance their sustainability agenda, and more than a third use or plan to use agentic AI for sustainability initiatives. At the same time, the environmental implications of AI are increasingly being recognized at senior levels. Seven in 10 organizations say AI’s sustainability implications are discussed in the boardroom.
However, oversight and disclosure of the technology remain limited. Nearly half of executives say AI has significantly increased greenhouse gas emissions. Yet concern about AI’s environmental impact appears to be outpacing organizations’ ability to measure it: just over a third of executives say their organization measures the energy consumption of AI systems and workloads, and the associated carbon footprint.