In a year marked by market turmoil, adjustments to regulatory deadlines and accelerated technological changes, the sustainability of supply and logistics chains remains a high priority at the corporate level. Companies worldwide continue to invest in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, resilience to disruptions and transparency toward stakeholders, but they still lag behind in measurement accuracy, data quality and the integration of sustainability into financial indicators. This gap between the will to act and the quality of metrics becomes a crucial factor that determines the profitability and speed of transformation.

What has changed by October 7, 2025: the context that governs decisions

The business context for sustainable supply chains in 2025 is shaped by three powerful forces: (1) the European wave of mandatory reporting on impacts and risks with a gradual phasing of obligations, (2) uncertainty surrounding climate reporting in the US, and (3) the standardization of methods for calculating emissions in transport and logistics. In practice, this means that the same company today must plan reporting according to European rules, monitor the legal status of regulations in the US if it is listed or operates in that market, and at the same time harmonize its emission calculations with new international standards and customer expectations.

The global pulse: sustainability is still a priority, but measurement systems are lagging

Large surveys among supply chain and logistics experts in 2024 and 2025 confirm that most companies maintain or increase activities to reduce emissions, more efficient transport and more responsible procurement. The most common motivators differ by region: in Europe, regulatory pressure and reporting expectations prevail, while in North America, management and investors are strong drivers, along with competitive pressure within the sector. However, companies often measure what is available, not what should actually be measured. It is the precision of metrics — the method, boundaries, quality and repeatability — that is the point where the most potential savings and climate benefits are lost.

Why emissions from the value chain are still a „blind spot”

The largest part of the greenhouse gas footprint in many sectors is generated outside their own plants and purchased energy — in the value chain. This includes the supply of raw materials, production at suppliers, long-distance transport, product use and its disposal. That is why the participation of suppliers in data collection and emission reduction becomes crucial. At the same time, many companies still rely on spreadsheet estimates, average emission factors and financial proxies for their calculations. The result is great uncertainties, „double counting” and the risk of making wrong investment decisions.

Data quality: from averages to real measurements

The path to a reliable calculation leads through three steps. First, the appropriate system boundaries and allocations are defined, with a clear distinction between direct (Scope 1), indirect from purchased energy (Scope 2) and other indirect emissions (Scope 3). Second, supplier data and specific process data are preferred, and only when they are not available are secondary sources and databases used. Third, the automation of collection and validation (quality controls, sampling, revision) is introduced, along with methods for estimating uncertainty. Only such an approach enables setting realistic goals, rewarding suppliers with lower emissions and precisely monitoring progress.

From Excel spreadsheets to LCA software and digital twins

For many companies, the transitional step is the transition from static spreadsheets to life cycle assessment (LCA) tools and platforms that collect data from multiple systems (ERP, WMS/TMS, procurement systems, IoT devices, smart energy meters). Digital twins of the supply chain enable scenario simulations: changing the route, combining means of transport, consolidating shipments, changing packaging, switching to suppliers with production on renewable sources. These models calculate emissions with the temporal and spatial granularity needed to make decisions at the portfolio level and for individual orders.

The regulatory picture 2025: between tightening and delays

In the European Union, the rules on corporate sustainability reporting are coming into full force: the first reports according to the new European standards will be published in 2025 for the financial year 2024, with a phased inclusion of a larger circle of companies in the following years. At the same time, discussions about simplifying and reducing the administrative burden led to revised proposals and delays for parts of the obligations, especially for smaller and medium-sized reporting scope. For companies operating in the EU, this means the need for a more detailed assessment of financially material topics, a clearer connection of climate goals with business strategy and an improvement of data quality controls.

In the US, the picture is more complex: after climate rules on risk and emission disclosure were adopted in 2024, legal battles and a temporary pause in implementation soon followed, and then an institutional decision in 2025 to withdraw the active defense of the regulations. This does not remove investor expectations or market pressure, but it changes short-term obligations and further emphasizes voluntary frameworks and customer demands in global chains.

Transport and logistics: new rules, new costs, new opportunities

Emissions from transport make up a significant part of the supply chain footprint, especially in international trade. As of 2025, the European package of measures introduces stricter requirements for the maritime sector — with a limitation on the intensity of greenhouse gases in fuels and mitigation systems such as "pooling" — which increases the costs of conventional bunker and encourages the transition to mixtures of biofuels, e-methanol and other low-carbon options. At the same time, the rules on infrastructure for alternative fuels on the roads accelerate the construction of charging stations and the standardization of communication protocols between vehicles and the charging station, which facilitates the electrification of fleets and a more precise calculation of consumption and emissions.

On a global level, the maritime sector is strengthening its goals by mid-century, and rail and road transport are going through a combination of regulation and market signals (the price of emissions, efficiency standards, data requirements). For operators, this opens up space for tactical measures with a quick effect — optimization of occupancy, consolidation and route planning with the help of time and traffic data — and for structural decisions about vehicle and fuel technologies.

Standardization of measurements in transport: ISO 14083 and industry guidelines

In order to avoid the "noise" of different methodologies, the international standard for the quantification and reporting of emissions in passenger and freight transport now provides a common language for logistics operations across all modes. Harmonization with these rules — along with industry frameworks for the supply chain — enables the comparability of data between carriers, freight forwarders and shippers, and more precise contracting and monitoring of goals. In addition, new EU rules for maritime transport (as part of the climate package) are gradually lowering the allowed fuel intensity, while infrastructure rules determine the minimum densities and technical requirements for charging stations, which accelerates the transition to electric and hydrogen power in road traffic.

Methodological updates: what do GHG Protocol upgrades bring

Updates to the most widely used global framework for calculating emissions in 2024 and 2025 focus on clearer definitions of boundaries, consolidation approaches, data quality assessments and the treatment of market instruments (e.g. contracts for renewable energy or low-carbon fuels). For practitioners, this means that technical decisions — for example, whether to use "well-to-wheel" or "well-to-wake" modeling, how to treat recycled materials, or how to avoid double counting in a chain with multiple intermediaries — will have an increasing impact on the credibility of reports and credibility toward auditors and investors.

From strategy to operational plan: how to build a „data skeleton”

The simplest way to overcome the gap between ambition and exactness is to set up a "data skeleton" of the supply chain. This includes: mapping key flows of materials, energy and money; identifying critical suppliers and transport routes; choosing reference databases and emission factors; built-in quality controls; and a plan for compliance with the audit trail. This is followed by contracting data with suppliers (Service-Level from a data perspective), and commercial incentives such as differentiated prices and "preferred supplier" for those with better results.

Technological layer: integrations that bring „milliseconds” and millions

Modern procurement and logistics systems enable the integration of supplier APIs, EDI messages, data from telematics and IoT sensors, and data from energy management systems. This is supplemented by LCA libraries and simulation modules that calculate emissions and costs for each order under different scenarios (e.g. rail instead of road on a specific route, different packaging or consolidation of deliveries). The automation of validation and warnings about anomalies (e.g. an unusually high factor for a certain supplier category) reduces the risk of error and speeds up reporting cycles.

The financial dimension: how to translate CO₂ into P&L language

For executives and boards, the most meaningful metrics are those that translate carbon into operational and financial decisions. Three belts of metrics are proving to be the most useful: (1) emission intensity per unit of revenue, volume or unit delivered; (2) margin after "carbon cost" (e.g. a hypothetical CO₂ price or fuel cost under new rules); (3) "capex per ton of avoided emissions" for investment decisions. When these metrics are built into controlling, procurement and logistics functions get clear signals where investments bring return and climate impact at the same time.

Example of an operational table: 12 KPIs that both clients and auditors are looking for

• Share of procurement with supplier data verification (percentage of consumption covered by "supplier-specific" factors).


• Share of transport orders with calculation according to ISO 14083 or equivalent methodology.


• Emission intensity in transport per ton-kilometer and per order, with a breakdown by mode (road, rail, sea, air).


• Share of consolidated deliveries on export-import routes with the highest volume.


• Share of suppliers with goals aligned with science-based pathways (e.g. SBT).


• Share of energy consumption from renewable sources in own plants and at key suppliers.


• Average delay and variability of delivery time on routes with alternative fuels compared to the fossil baseline.


• "Data quality" scorecard (shares of primary, secondary and modeled data; rate of audit corrections).


• Transport price per ton-kilometer with and without the effect of new fuel regulations.


• Capex/Opex per ton of avoided emissions in logistics projects (e.g. electric tractors, OPS in ports).


• Return on investment rate in efficiency projects (aerodynamic additions, route optimization, smart charging).


• Share of procurement categories with contracted reporting and verification terms.

Supplier management: from „survey” to contracted obligations

The key to reliable Scope 3 calculations lies in systematic cooperation with suppliers. Instead of one-time questionnaires with general questions, contractual clauses that define: mandatory data formats, delivery deadlines, rights to audit and corrections, and incentives and penalties related to data quality and emission reduction are increasingly applied. Large buyers are introducing "accelerators" — technical assistance for suppliers in data collection, methodology selection and development of reduction plans — because the investment is returned through a lower product footprint, more competitive offers and less regulatory risk.

Tough questions: biofuels, e-fuels and the risk of emission shifting

As stricter rules for fuels in maritime and aviation are introduced, the demand for sustainable alternatives is growing. However, the capacities and supply chains of these fuels are still limited, and the standards of credibility and verification are being perfected. Companies that are considering switching to biofuels need to assess the competition for the same resources (aviation, heavy road transport), methods of proving sustainability and the effects on freight prices. Planning a fuel portfolio — with a combination of biofuels, electrification, e-methanol, ammonia or LNG — becomes a strategic issue, with different horizons of profitability and availability.

EU rules and useful resources for practitioners

• Guides and official pages on corporate sustainability reporting (CSRD/ESRS) and announcements of deadline simplifications.


• Pages with clarifications on rules for the maritime sector (FuelEU Maritime) and industry summaries on cost dynamics and compliance models.


• Information on infrastructure for alternative fuels (AFIR) and technical standards for communication between vehicles and charging stations.


• Frameworks and standards for calculation in logistics, including ISO 14083 which standardizes the calculation of emissions across transport modes.


• GHG Protocol frameworks and working groups that are working during 2025 on a clearer treatment of boundaries, consolidation, data quality and market instruments.

Mapping the path: what to do in the next 90 days

1. Data status assessment: determine for which categories there is data coverage at the supplier level, and where average factors are still used; introduce "data quality" ratings and a list of critical gaps.


2. Methodology alignment: formalize the application of ISO 14083 in transport, select LCA libraries and allocation rules, and define the application of the "well-to-wake" or "cradle-to-gate" approach depending on the category.


3. Contracting with suppliers: introduce contractual obligations for data delivery and an audit trail; define incentives for emission reduction and bonuses for accuracy and timeliness.


4. Transport management: test combinations of modes and fuels on key routes; include the parameters of the new European rules on fuels and infrastructure in price and risk calculations.


5. Financial integration: set project profitability thresholds through "capex per ton of avoided emissions" and plan amortization with regard to regulatory deadlines.


6. Technical integrations: connect ERP/TMS/WMS with LCA tools and data collection platforms; automate validation, logging and audits.


7. Change management: train procurement, logistics and finance to work with new metrics; communication plan for customers and investors about progress and limitations.

Sectoral nuances: industries with the greatest "Scope 3" potential

Sectors with a large share of emissions from product use (e.g. the automotive industry) focus on energy efficiency and electrification of end use, while sectors with deep supply chains (e.g. the chemical and food industry) achieve the greatest effect through changes in recipes, replacement of raw materials and work with suppliers at the source. In retail and technology, the focus is on product design, circular models and logistical optimization, and in construction on environmental product declarations and low-carbon materials (cement, steel, glass). What they all have in common is that without credible data from the supply chain, there is no realistic decarbonization plan or credible narrative for the capital market.

Risks and opportunities in fuel and energy supply

As regulation tightens, companies with access to low-carbon energy and fuels gain a competitive advantage, but also carry new risks: volatility of alternative fuel prices, dependence on incentives, reputation risk regarding the sustainability of raw materials and the credibility of certificates. Long-term supply contracts (PPAs for electricity, offtake for e-fuels) become a strategic asset, and transparency "from source to end use" is a criterion for entering the chains of global brands.

Advanced practices: how pioneers close the circle of metrics, technology and contracts

The most advanced companies combine three threads: (1) a calculation method that gives comparable, auditable numbers; (2) technology that collects them almost in real time and uses them for optimization; (3) contractual mechanisms that embed carbon in the price and terms of cooperation. When this triangle is tightened, decisions about the route, supplier or product design automatically take into account both the financial and climate impact, and reports stop being "an exercise for the outside world" and become a management tool.

Resources and tools for 2025: where to start and what to follow

• Public summaries and infographics of major research on the sustainability of supply chains with trends and figures for 2025, useful for benchmarking internal programs.


• Regulatory pages with deadlines, ESRS requirements and guidelines for double materiality, and updates of proposals for administrative relief.


• Technical standards and guides (e.g. ISO 14083 for transport) that ensure that results are comparable between carriers, 3PLs and shippers.


• GHG Protocol frameworks and working groups that are working during 2025 on a clearer treatment of boundaries, consolidation, data quality and market instruments.


• Industry practices for the maritime sector and road transport in light of new rules on fuel intensity and infrastructure, including models of "pooling", banking and borrowing obligations.