CSRD - We need more reliability and less bureaucracy

Effective climate protection needs reliable facts. Only what is measured can be controlled and improved. In the past, however, communication around sustainability was often characterized by general goals and declarations of intent. This is where the CSRD introduced by the European Union comes in: It creates a binding framework and ensures comparability. 

I believe this approach is fundamentally the right one. Transparency is essential - but it must not be an end in itself. Companies must address the actual objective of the directive: to actively drive forward the sustainable transformation. Instead of investing valuable resources in bureaucratic reporting obligations, the CSRD should provide companies with targeted support in implementing effective measures for greater sustainability. 

As right as the intention of the CSRD is, it poses massive challenges for companies. The extreme scope of the reporting obligations is particularly problematic: over 1,000 data points have to be recorded. A company like RENOLIT can cope with this, but for many smaller companies it is almost impossible. 

The collection of emissions along the entire value chain - including upstream and downstream processes - is particularly challenging. Who is responsible for emissions that are far beyond our direct sphere of influence? Even if we optimize our own carbon footprint, most of it remains in the supply chain. But what if our partners do not have the capacity to provide the required data? 

This presents companies with a double challenge: ensuring reliable figures for reporting without forcing partners out of the supply chain due to excessive requirements. Too much bureaucracy can be counterproductive here. 

Many companies are waiting because the CSRD has not yet been finalized. But this harbors risks: If you act too late, you are under time pressure and have to react to complex requirements without any experience. That's why RENOLIT deliberately acted early. 

Instead of waiting, we proactively prepared for the new reporting obligations. Our aim was to create transparency at an early stage, adapt processes and not only meet the requirements, but also use them as a strategic opportunity. This is why we have already produced our first CSRD-compliant report. 

Why this step? Because sustainability is not just a regulatory requirement for us, but a central strategic task. Getting involved at an early stage has helped us to gain experience and position ourselves well for the long term. 

But this is exactly where the problem currently exists: while companies like RENOLIT are investing and adapting processes, politicians remain - to put it mildly - undecided. The implementation of the CSRD in Germany is being delayed, changes and simplifications are being repeatedly discussed at EU level - but nobody knows what will actually apply in the end. In April, the EU Parliament decided to postpone the reporting obligation by two years. At the same time, the change of government in Germany brings new priorities, the effects of which on reporting obligations are still completely unclear. But how can companies plan strategically if the rules of the game are constantly being renegotiated? We finally need clear, reliable guidelines. 

This uncertainty is not acceptable for companies. We can only invest in real sustainability if the framework conditions are stable and not constantly being renegotiated. Instead of developing long-term strategies, many companies are forced to wait and see - because no one can guarantee that today's requirements will still apply tomorrow. Frankly, this is not only frustrating, but also hinders progress.

• Clear and reliable rules that endure and are not constantly called into question by political changes of course. 
• Less bureaucracy so that companies can invest their resources in sustainable measures instead of tying them up with unnecessary reporting. 
• A practical approach that reconciles ambitious targets with economic reality instead of overburdening companies with obligations that are almost impossible to implement. 

Politicians must finally make a decision: Do we want real progress or a mere set of figures for reporting purposes? Companies are willing to take responsibility - but they need reliability in order to promote sustainability consistently and effectively. 

The topic is also so important to me because, despite the additional bureaucratic burden, CSRD also offers great opportunities for companies. Those who act early and deal intensively with the reporting obligations can position themselves as pioneers and create long-term competitive advantages. Customers, investors and business partners are increasingly looking to work with companies that operate sustainably. Those who can communicate their sustainability strategy credibly and comprehensibly will be preferred in the future. 

The CSRD is an important step towards greater sustainability and transparency. However, it also brings challenges with it that should not be underestimated. It is important to see sustainability not only as a regulatory requirement, but also as a strategic opportunity. To do this, however, companies need one thing above all: clear and reliable framework conditions. Without planning security, there can be no sustainable transformation. That is why we are calling on politicians to provide clear guidelines, less bureaucracy, more reliability and a pragmatic approach that supports companies rather than overburdening them.