Climate and Sustainability Communications in 2025: Back to Basics

“Companies Are Scaling Back Sustainability Pledges“

“Investors Pull Billions from Sustainable Funds Amid Political Heat“

“Five of Canada’s Big Six Banks Quit Global Climate Alliance“

Headlines like these suggest that companies are retreating from sustainability initiatives. The reality is that, despite the current backlash in some parts of North America, forward-looking companies continue to make progress on their sustainability and net-zero strategies…it just looks different. In some cases, unrealistic targets are being replaced with more meaningful action, especially in light of the recent amendment to our Competition Act aimed at claims and conduct pertaining to greenwashing. In others, sustainability and climate risks and opportunities are simply being reframed in light of the current context.

Read on to learn more about the evolution of climate and sustainability communications and how you can adjust your messaging to be as effective as possible.

The Evolution of Climate and Sustainability Communications

The language used to communicate sustainability concepts has evolved significantly over the last few decades.

The term Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) emerged in the 1950s and became mainstream in the early 2000s, evolving from a focus on philanthropy to the idea of shared value. Sustainability gained widespread recognition after the 1987 Brundtland Commission Report, which defined sustainable development as meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own. The Triple Bottom Line concept, promoting a sustainability framework that focuses on people, the planet, and profits, was introduced in the 1990s. It was followed by the concept of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG), which was officially coined in 2004 after gaining popularity as a framework for investors to evaluate the impacts of non-financial factors on a company’s long-term financial performance. However, as ESG initiatives often involve addressing environmental sustainability, social justice, and diversity, some critics and politicians have politicized ESG as part of the ‘woke agenda.’ When you add in the mixed performance of ESG funds, it’s been a rough time for the term ESG.

The terms used to discuss climate have evolved too. Global warming was the commonly used term until around 2010s, when climate change became widespread. This shift happened because ‘climate change’ was a more comprehensive description for the complex relationship between greenhouse gases (GHGs) and the effects on weather patterns (from rising temperatures to changes in precipitation patterns, sea level rise, and extreme weather events). However, the fundamental principles represented by these terms – i.e. the need for businesses to reduce emissions and address the real risks posed by a changing climate – have not changed.

And that’s the point. Times change, understanding evolves, and terms take on new meanings, but the fundamentals that underpin sustainability – for the planet and for businesses – have not changed. In fact, the business case for continued action on sustainability has grown because the business impacts and risks have also grown. What is very clear is that words matter: you can evoke different public sentiments depending on the terms you use.

Effective Climate and Sustainability Communications in 2025

Considering our current geopolitical context, we suggest experimenting with the following terminology and framing when engaging with key people and partners in and outside your organization.

Risk Management and Futureproofing: Research suggests that businesses that fail to adapt climate risks may lose up to 7% of annual earnings by 2035 – equivalent to the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic every two years. With stats like those, it’s hard for anyone to argue against risk mitigation — whether that’s ensuring regulatory compliance, avoiding supply chain disruptions, or addressing anything that impacts financial returns in the short or long term. Developing strategies to address the risk of climate change in your business (whether those are physical or transition risks) is hard to dispute.

It’s also important to connect climate and sustainability issues to real life, which will increase their relevance. Cost of living and affordability is a good place to start. For example, extreme weather events in Canada have significantly increased insurance claims, with insured losses surpassing $8.5B in 2024. These rising costs have led to higher insurance premiums, impacting the affordability of homes and creating additional financial pressure on homeowners. There’s a real opportunity for businesses to better connect the dots between sustainability and climate issues and impacts that matter to consumers.

Efficiency and Cost Savings: Connecting climate and sustainability initiatives to efficiencies, waste reduction, and enhanced economic performance highlights the tangible financial benefits of sustainability initiatives. In an environment where Canadians increasingly do not support policies that are perceived to increase costs, using terminology like ‘efficiency’ and ‘cost savings’ in climate communications can be highly effective. The term ‘resource efficiency’ is particularly relevant when discussing energy and water, as it emphasizes the optimal use of resources to minimize waste and costs and grow the bottom line.

Economic Benefits and Competitive Advantage: Given the ongoing trade and geopolitical tensions, messages that emphasize job creation, diversification, and economic resilience will likely resonate with your stakeholders. They could also help you attract capital. For example, Canada has benefitted from having one of the cleanest electricity grids globally, with over 80% power from renewable and non-emitting sources. This has attracted significant investment, including $44 billion in new investments for EV and battery plants in Ontario.

Security and Reliability: Inserting ‘security’ and ‘reliability’ into discussions about natural resources such as energy, minerals, timber, and water may be effective. These terms carry connotations of protection, stewardship, and responsibility, which encourage proactive engagement and a sense of duty. This approach not only underscores the critical need to safeguard vital resources but also fosters a sense of collective commitment to sustainable practices.

Localized, Relatable Stories: Focusing solely on global facts and statistics can make climate and sustainability issues seem intangible and distant, leading to a sense of detachment and inaction. By contrast, telling localized and relatable stories about climate and sustainability impacts in our own communities can make them feel more personal and urgent. For example, Robert McLeman of RinkWatch.org helps Canadians understand the impacts of rising temperatures by connecting it to a beloved Canadian pastime – backyard ice rinks: “In the old days, […] you just flooded straight onto the snow, but the ground doesn’t freeze as solid as it used to.” Localized narratives not only foster a deeper emotional connection but also promote a common understanding of the situation, encouraging collective action and engagement.

Where to from here?

This is an opportunity for businesses to adapt their communications to focus on what matters to them most. Before you start the conversation with your stakeholders, consider the following:

• Understand your audience: Engage with your stakeholders to understand their various perspectives and values and tailor messaging accordingly. Look to previous research on public sentiment towards climate change, such as the Five Canadas and the Six Americas as a starting point. Climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe is also an excellent source of sound recommendations, including choosing the right messenger – ideally, someone that your audience knows and trusts.
• Find common ground. Framing climate as a public health crisis has been shown to be effective across all political backgrounds (it’s hard to argue against the benefits of clean air and water).The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) has been successful in advocating for climate policy by connecting the impacts of climate change (such as air pollution and heat waves) to the health of Canadians, linking it to cardiovascular and respiratory disease.
• Use neutral language: To ensure wider acceptance and understanding of your climate and sustainability goals and initiatives, try using neutral language that doesn’t shame or scold people into doing things differently. Think of this as a materiality vs. morality approach, where you’re acting on these issues because it’s good for business, not just the right thing to do. Highlighting successes and opportunities to work together will likely be even more effective as people tend to respond better to hopeful messages that provide them with a sense of agency.
• Focus on competitiveness, resilience, and value creation: Telling a story that focuses on how you are identifying and responding to material risks and opportunities —and becoming more competitive and resilient and generating more value as a result — will never be an outdated activity.

If you’re looking for guidance on how your organization can navigate the evolving climate and sustainability landscape, Delphi is here to help. Reach out to learn how we can support you on your journey: Eleanor Eden, Senior Consultant, Climate Risk and Sustainable Finance, eeden@delphi.ca; Dave Photiadis, Senior Director, dphotiadis@delphi.ca; Helena Teng, Intern Analyst, hteng@delphi.ca.