Last Year, Just 25% of Big Companies Used “ESG” in Their Report Titles

As corporate sustainability efforts and reporting become more complex and scrutinized, large US companies are adapting their communications. The share of S&P 100 companies using “ESG” in their annual sustainability report titles dropped from 40% in 2023 to 25% in 2024. In 2025, with nearly half of companies having already reported, just 6% have used the term.

New research by The Conference Board shows that, while companies are shifting away from the term “ESG,” they aren’t backing away from their strategies or commitments. Public disclosures point to significant progress in various areas of sustainability and climate: For example, 87% of S&P 500 firms have disclosed climate-related targets in their 2024 public statements—the same share that did so the year prior.

"Many companies are adjusting terminology in response to backlash, adopting terms in their report titles that are less politically charged, like 'sustainability' and ‘impact,’” said Andrew Jones, Principal Researcher at The Conference Board Governance & Sustainability Center and author of the report.

The findings are based on 1) public disclosure data from S&P 500 and Russell 3000 companies, current as of April 11, 2025; and 2) a series of surveys and polls of sustainability executives at over 60 US and European companies. The insights are featured in two reports, developed with ESGAUGE, focused on sustainability terminology and climate disclosures. Additional insights include:

Terminology

Companies are shifting away from the term "ESG" in external communications, amid heightened backlash.  

• The share of S&P 100 companies publishing reports with "ESG" in their titles declined from a peak of 40% in 2023 to 25% in 2024, with data so far showing only 6% have used the term in reports published in 2025.

Many US companies are feeling uncertain or overwhelmed by sustainability reporting challenges in 2025.  

• Amid political and regulatory uncertainty, only 10% of US sustainability leaders are more optimistic about reporting than last year—31% are more concerned, 34% are uncertain, and 14% are overwhelmed.

But most firms aren’t changing their definition of sustainability.

• Only 8% of surveyed sustainability executives said their firms are reevaluating their definition of sustainability in response to changing US policies.

Climate Targets

Most large companies continue to set climate goals—but many are adjusting their target dates.

• Most S&P 500 firms (87%) have disclosed climate-related targets.
  • In recent years, the median target year to achieve such targets shifted from 2030 to 2035.

Only a minority of surveyed executives express high confidence in achieving these climate targets.

• Just 13% of sustainability executives express high confidence in achieving publicly stated climate targets, with 43% expressing uncertainty or doubt.

Factors contributing to executives’ uncertainty include feasibility concerns, regulatory shifts, and backlash.

• Feasibility concerns: Many targets were set without fully assessing operational, technological, or financial constraints. As implementation progresses, companies are revising them to reflect practical realities.
• Regulatory and framework shifts: Evolving disclosure requirements are prompting companies to reassess how targets are defined, measured, and reported.
• Litigation and greenwashing risk: Long-term targets now carry greater exposure, with increasing scrutiny from regulators and potential lawsuits from shareholders or activists.
• ESG backlash: The politicization of ESG, particularly in the US, has made climate commitments riskier.

"Companies should proactively engage stakeholders—including regulators, investors, and society—to communicate how targets are being implemented and adjusted, not just announced. This transparency is key to building trust, mitigating legal risk, and maintaining credibility in an increasingly scrutinized environment," said Jeff Hoffman, Interim Center Leader, Governance & Sustainability, The Conference Board.  

Climate Risk

More companies are disclosing climate change as a risk.

• Operational disruptions from these events are growing, with examples ranging from weather-related shutdowns in auto manufacturing to home insurance providers retreating from markets prone to wildfires.
  • Russell 3000: From 2021 to 2024, the share of companies disclosing climate change as a risk factor increased from 30% to 56%.
  • S&P 500: The share increased from 67% to 84%.

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions

Firms have made tangible progress in reducing “scope 1” (direct) and “scope 2” (electricity-related) GHG emissions—reflecting sustained focus on addressing climate change.

• GHG reductions have been more pronounced among Russell 3000 companies than those in the S&P 500.
  • Russell 3000: From 2021 to 2024, median “scope 1” and “scope 2” emissions dropped by 45% and 69%, respectively.
  • S&P 500: Median “scope 1” and “scope 2” emissions dropped by 2% and 45%, respectively.

Progress on “scope 3” (indirect emissions across value chains) is mixed—and hindered by data limitations.

• Measuring these emissions is difficult due to limited supplier data, inconsistent methodologies, and dependence on proxies or industry averages. However, companies are improving capacity.
  • Russell 3000: From 2021 to 2024, the share disclosing “scope 3” emissions grew from 21% to 35%.
  • S&P 500: The share increased from 62% to 78%.

Median “scope 3” emissions increased for both Russell 3000 and S&P 500 companies.

• The percentage rise was more pronounced among smaller and mid-sized companies in the Russell 3000, likely reflecting expanded disclosure.
  • Russell 3000: From 2021 to 2024, median “scope 3” emissions increased by 28%.
  • S&P 500: Median “scope 3” emissions decreased by 14%.

“Disclosure of ‘scope 3’ emissions lags but is rising, reflecting mounting regulatory and stakeholder pressure for comprehensive emissions transparency. This rise in reporting is particularly notable given its complexity and reputational sensitivity, signaling growing readiness for compliance with regulatory mandates,” said Umesh Chandra Tiwari, Executive Director of ESGAUGE.