Quest Impact Design Studio

What are alt tags?

Alt tags are brief descriptions embedded within an image’s HTML code that describe what the image depicts. These descriptions serve multiple purposes: they provide essential information to people who cannot see the images, ensure that search engines understand the content of the images, and appear on the page when images fail to load due to connectivity issues.

To put it simply, alt tags are the key to making sure that images are not just decorative elements but informative and accessible to all users.

The role of alt tags in digital accessibility

The web should be a place where everyone can access information equally. For people with visual impairments, screen readers are essential tools that interpret web content. However, without alt tags, screen readers cannot convey what an image represents, effectively leaving users in the dark. This exclusionary practice can harm a brand’s reputation and alienate a significant portion of the audience.

Alt tags ensure that visually impaired users can fully engage with content by providing descriptions of images that might otherwise go unnoticed. For instance, instead of a screen reader announcing “image,” it can convey “man doing yoga in front of the ocean”, offering context and meaning. But if you run a company focused on personal workout coaching, for instance, you might want to add which muscle(s) this person is stretching and how he’s doing that.

Man doing yoga in front of the ocean

The SEO benefits of alt tags

Beyond their accessibility advantages, alt tags also serve as a vital component of SEO strategies. Search engines like Google use alt text to understand the content of images, which can help improve a website’s ranking in search results. For example, if you run a blog about travel gear, including the phrase “best carry-on luggage” in your alt text can make your site more discoverable for related searches.

This dual function of alt tags — as a tool for accessibility and a means to enhance SEO — makes them indispensable in modern web design.

Best practices for writing effective alt tags

Creating alt tags that are both descriptive and concise is an art. Here are some best practices to ensure your alt tags are impactful:

  1. Prioritize context: Describe the image in a way that adds value to the surrounding content. For example, “labrador playing in the park” might be appropriate for a pet care blog, whereas “adopt a labrador puppy” could be more relevant for an adoption site.
  2. Avoid redundancies: Skip phrases like “image of” or “photo of,” which are unnecessary. The alt tag should go straight to the point, focusing on what’s essential about the image.
  3. Incorporate keywords thoughtfully: While it’s important to include keywords to boost SEO, they should be used naturally within the description. Keywords should not compromise the clarity and usefulness of the alt text.
  4. Omit decorative images: Not all images need alt text. If an image is purely decorative, it’s better to use an empty alt attribute (alt=””) so that screen readers can skip over it. This prevents confusion and keeps the focus on content that adds value.

Conclusion: alt tags as a pillar of digital inclusivity

In today’s digital age, where inclusivity is no longer just a buzzword but a necessity, alt tags are a simple yet powerful tool to ensure that your content is accessible to everyone. By thoughtfully crafting alt text, you can make your website more welcoming to users with visual impairments and improve your visibility in search engine results.

Incorporating alt tags into your content strategy is not just a technical task, it’s a commitment to making the web a more inclusive space. As you build and grow your digital presence, remember that accessibility starts with the details, and alt tags are one of the most important details you can focus on.

Ever since the Paris Agreement came into fruition almost ten years ago, worldwide consensus has been to remove carbon from the atmosphere whilst reducing our greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions with the hope of reaching net zero by the middle of the century. It is our beacon of hope in transitioning towards a more regenerative and renewable future. With the largest chunk of GHG emissions associated with climate breakdown coming from business-driven economic activities, it is clear that organizations across sectors have a massive role to play today and tomorrow.

But what does net zero even mean?

In a nutshell, net zero represents a state in which GHG emissions from human activities and the removal of these gases are balanced over a given period of time. This entails removing as many emissions as we produce. While it may seem like a great idea in principle, achieving net zero remains challenging for many companies in practice as it requires innovative technologies and cooperation across the entire value chain.

How do we achieve net zero?

As more companies are exposed to risks imposed by the climate crisis and other external pressures, more and more of them are adopting specific targets and strategies to do something about it. They set targets and bold ambitions with a combination of different approaches to reach net zero: 

  • Actions to reduce their own emissions as well as those across their value chain
  • Actions to directly remove greenhouse gasses from the atmosphere
  • Actions to offset their emissions by purchasing carbon credits

Why is it a problem to solely focus on GHG emissions?

Today it often appears that GHG emissions are the only source of damage inflicted by humanity on our planet. It causes all efforts to be focused on that rather than looking at the bigger picture. It diverts attention from other pressing environmental issues that need our attention. This prompts the question: has net zero purely become a misleading and unhelpful badge that companies strive for? Time to look at three key issues behind net zero.

Issues with net zero summed in an infographic

Issue #1 – Setting a target with no concrete action

Net zero claims vary enormously in terms of credibility. To date, there is no binding regulation requiring a transition to net zero, meaning that commitments and targets are purely made on a voluntary basis with little to no accountability, transparency or enforcement. Despite numerous promises and goals made in the past, few have been achieved. While some companies embark on clearly-defined pathways to reduce GHG emissions like Science Based Targets, even these initiatives have come under recent scrutiny for allowing the offsetting of Scope 3 emissions.  Now more than ever, companies are jumping on the bandwagon making ambitious pledges to reach net zero emissions by 2050. Yet, many are uncertain where to even get started…

Issue #2 – Compensating emissions through offsets

Many companies have embarked on a sustainability journey that requires the bare minimum. They base their efforts on continuing with business as usual and to instead rely on carbon offsets to make amends for the damage they cause. They compensate for their emissions by investing in projects that remove greenhouse gasses from the atmosphere, such as tree planting . The classic ‘burn now, pay later’ approach undermines the urgency of emission reductions by actively postponing action. 

To set the record straight here, not all offsetting schemes lack positive impact. However, the real issue is the lack of measurement and quality control coupled with companies’ over-reliance on doing what they have always been doing without prioritizing the reduction of emissions. They instead compensate and feel that they are off the hook without having to change their own operations.

Issue #3 – Falling into the carbon tunnel vision trap 

There is no doubt that limiting GHG emissions is imperative to fighting the climate crisis. GHG emissions are the primary contributor to global warming, making their reduction imperative for our future. It is therefore understandable that they are a common feature in most sustainability strategies out there. 

However, this focus can lead to some misunderstandings. A comprehensive sustainability strategy should not solely focus on a narrow concept of net zero, but instead encompass a broad range of challenges, risks, and implications. A narrow focus on carbon emissions can limit our ability to  drive impactful action by narrowly emphasizing on one metric alone: GHG emissions. This blind spot causes us to overlook other significant aspects integral to sustainability and ESG.

How can we adopt systemic thinking?

To achieve widespread and lasting impact, we must adopt holistic and system thinking in our approach to sustainability. Broadening horizons will not only allow us to explore new opportunities but also address present and future risks comprehensively. 

There are a myriad of complex and interrelated factors that go far beyond GHG emissions. From soil degradation to desertification, from water pollution to biodiversity loss, our planet is facing a range of inextricably intertwined issues all related to net zero emissions. By overwhelmingly focusing on emissions, we have neglected our greatest ally in taking out CO2e from the atmosphere and storing it away: nature. Without nature, achieving net zero is unattainable.

Using double materiality to focus your priorities

The question that arises now is: what should we prioritize instead? For actionable steps and a comprehensive sustainability approach, we can turn to a double materiality assessment. A strategic and impactful way of addressing the most pressing ESG risks and opportunities that your business may face. Instead of providing a long list for you to tackle, double materiality checks for interdependencies by clustering them into well-defined factors to consider. It looks at the impact that your business has on the planet and society, whilst also unfolding the potential impact a changing planet will have on your operations. By taking into account all stakeholders, a business can then prioritize which issues to focus on first and therefore not overlook new potential possibilities to drive meaningful, impactful action.

Conclusion

The need to go beyond GHG emissions does by no means downplay the value of reducing and removing emissions. Instead, it highlights the necessity of  taking comprehensive and holistic action across various sustainability dimensions. The planetary crisis we face is multifaceted and interconnected, and so should also be our approach to combating it.

How can we help?

Our Double Materiality Assessment not only analyzes the external impact on your finances but also scrutinizes the impact your company has on the planet and people. We help you shape a relevant, multidimensional sustainability strategy by looking at all essential ESG aspects of your business.

Learn more

It is fair to say that we are bombarded with adverts across various media channels almost every day, all day. They fill our news feed, appear on our commute to work, and interrupt our favourite TV show. Still today, a significant amount of those adverts stem from fossil fuel companies that want to green their image by making us believe that they are part of the solution towards a green economy. In an unprecedented move, one media agency has now been uncovered in helping fossil fuel companies push false claims to the eyes and ears of consumers.

What exactly happened?

Media agencies have been working with all sorts of ‘dirty’ industries for a very long time. And yet, when Shell’s selection of Havas, a major French media agency, came to light in Mid-September 2023, many people raised their eyebrows. How could a marriage between an agency with B Corp status and a fossil fuel company go unnoticed or be tolerated by society in times like these? Fast forward to the summer 2024, after sustained pressure and complaints from a coalition of other agencies condemning this partnership, four agencies owned by French advertising group Havas were stripped of their B Corp status. While it may not be the first time that B Lab strips companies of their B Corp status (remember the BrewDog case), this still remains an unprecedented move that may forever change the rules of the game.

What is the B Corp certification and how does it help?

The B Corp certification is today one of the most renowned sustainability labels that distinguish businesses acting as a force for good. Organisations that act for, rather than against, people and the planet. And the process to become certified is by no means easy. Analysed and assessed by B Lab, businesses have to showcase how they minimise their negative impact and embed sustainability within their core operations. While the certification is open for all profit-making corporations, one thing that the certification has been firm about for a long time is its stand on prohibiting controversial industries such as fossil fuels to become part of this exclusive community. The certification can by no means be used to cover persistent greenwashing. 

However, this has not stopped fossil fuel companies from working closely with other B Corp companies, such as Havas, that claim to be ethical and environmentally-friendly. A move that breaches B Lab’s core values expressed in its Declaration of Interdependence. In order to ensure its long-term viability and to overcome public scrutiny, B Lab is now evolving its standards to include more rigorous due diligence for environmental impact and human rights. They are due to be released later in 2025.

B Corp logo

What are governments doing about it?

‘The godfathers of climate chaos.’ That is what fossil fuel companies are in the words of António Guterres, UN Secretary General. Like many other people around the world, he is calling for an end to fossil fuels and particularly addresses those that continue to aid and abet them. In other words: advertising and PR companies.

While many governments restrict or prohibit advertising for products that harm human health, just like tobacco, almost none have taken concrete action in protecting us against fossil fuels. In 2022, France became the first country in the world to ban adverts for fossil fuel companies, even though its law doesn’t come without loopholes. Cities such as Amsterdam have also kickstarted initiatives to ban fossil fuels advertising in public spaces such as public transport, but it is clear that so much more needs to be done.

So, what next?

It’s worth noting that Havas is not the only media agency group to have fossil-fuel clients. On the one side they portray themselves as climate champions, while behind the curtain they continue to simultaneously advance the interests of fossil fuel companies. As more and more of us are demanding full transparency, many more will be uncovered and questioned for ethics, integrity, and malpractice. Facing this reputational risk, there is no doubt that agencies can also become the catalysts of change that use their power and ability to influence people’s behaviour to make more environmentally friendly choices, rather than inflicting further harm to people and the planet. We therefore call all agencies to not be seduced by the lucrative deals offered by fossil fuels, but to instead make a genuine commitment to divest from working with them. It is everyone’s responsibility to move away from fossil fuels and embark on a journey towards regeneration.

To B Corp or not to B Corp? As a B Corp certified consultancy, we truly believe that businesses have a responsibility to amplify their positive impact. By coaching and training businesses on their road to certification, we ensure that every eligible business can become a reason for hope and a force for good.

 

Need help on your journey towards B Corp certification?

It is time to reduce your negative impact, and most importantly make a positive change. We are here to help you on that journey.

Let's chat!

Every second, nearly 2,000 kilograms of food are wasted in the EU. Food that could nourish communities. Food that required land, water, labour, and energy to grow. Food that—more often than not—ends up in landfills, accelerating climate change.

But now, the EU is taking action and Quest was among the panel of 70+ experts that pushed them in the right direction. 

European policymakers have reached a deal on legally binding food waste reduction targets, aiming to cut waste by 30% per capita in retail, restaurants, and households by 2030. It’s an important step. A long-overdue one. But will it be enough?

The Reality of Food Waste in Europe

In 2022, the EU generated 59.2 million tonnes of food waste. That’s 132 kg per person—roughly the weight of a grown adult. The biggest culprit? Households, responsible for over half of all food waste. But restaurants, supermarkets, and food manufacturers also play a significant role.

And the cost is staggering:

  • Financially, food waste costs EU consumers and businesses billions annually.
  • Environmentally, it contributes to nearly 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Ethically it’s an undeniable injustice in a world where one in ten people still face food insecurity.
The EU is for the first time setting ambitious food waste reduction targets, for more sustainable food systems in the EU.
Paulina Hennig-Kloska, Polish Minister for Climate and Environment

So what’s changing and what will be the impact?

The new EU agreement sets legally binding targets to cut food waste by 10% in manufacturing and processing and by 30% per capita in retail, food services, and households by 2030. Large food businesses will be required to donate surplus food rather than discard it, ensuring more edible food reaches those in need.

Businesses will need rethink how they manage waste and redesign their operations to minimize losses and improve efficiency across production and distribution. They will also be the ones to bear financial responsibility for waste collection, sorting, and recycling.

 

Will it be enough?

While this agreement is a step in the right direction, several challenges remain:

  1. Will countries enforce the rules effectively? Policy is one thing—implementation is another.
  2. Are the targets ambitious enough? Food waste campaigners argue that we need even more aggressive reductions.
  3. How will businesses react? Will they truly embrace change, or look for loopholes?

 

A much-needed turning point?

The EU’s new deal is a sign of progress. It acknowledges that waste isn’t just an unfortunate byproduct—it’s a system failure. It pushes businesses and consumers alike to rethink how food is produced, consumed, and valued.

But regulation alone won’t solve this crisis. We need businesses that lead by example, citizens who demand better, and a collective shift in mindset—where food is cherished, not wasted.

Because at the end of the day, food is meant to be eaten, not thrown away.

Ready to take action on food waste?

It is time to reduce your negative impact, and most importantly make a positive change. We are here to help you on that journey.

Let's chat!

From April 24–26, the Grand Palais in Paris (yes, what a venue!) transformed into a global hub of climate innovation for ChangeNOW 2025. Marking the 10th anniversary of the Paris Agreement, this year’s edition gathered over 40,000 participants from 140 countries, including 10,000 companies and 1,200 investors, all united to accelerate the ecological and social transition. And yes, we were part of it!

What were some of the key takeaways? 

A Decade Since The Paris Agreement: Reflecting and Recommiting

ChangeNOW 2025 commemorated the 10-year milestone of the Paris Agreement, bringing together key figures like Laurent Fabius, former President of COP21, and Patricia Espinosa, former UN Climate Chief. Their presence underscored the urgency to translate past commitments into tangible actions, especially in light of recent challenges such as record global temperatures and geopolitical shifts affecting climate policy.

Even with so many negative headlines making the news, we truly believe that the movement towards a more sustainable future is already under way and cannot be stopped.

 

Showcasing over 1000 Innovative Solutions

The event featured an extensive exhibition of over 1,000 groundbreaking solutions across sectors like clean energy, biodiversity, sustainable cities, and the circular economy. Startups and established companies alike presented innovations aimed at addressing pressing environmental challenges. ​

Quest was present to showcase our latest developments on the Impact Scan — a tool that gives an all-around picture of the current state of sustainability in any company and a key reference point to help them become more sustainable.

 

Biodiversity: From Crisis to Regeneration

Biodiversity was a central theme at ChangeNOW 2025, emphasizing the urgent need to protect and restore ecosystems. Innovative solutions showcased included nature-based approaches and the application of AI for conservation efforts.

As co-founders of Habitats Foundation, we were happy to see that so many people are now raising the flag for biodiversity action and are willing to take the conservation, protection, and restoration of our planet seriously.

 

 

AI for Impact: Innovations Meets Responsibility

AI was spotlighted as a transformative tool for environmental and social solutions. Dedicated sessions addressed AI’s potential in health, climate, and education, while also confronting challenges like its carbon footprint and ethical implications.

At Quest, we see AI not just as a tool, but as a powerful enabler of systemic change. When guided by human values and planetary boundaries, it can amplify our impact—from identifying biodiversity loss hotspots to optimizing circular supply chains. But we also believe that its deployment must be rooted in justice, transparency, and sustainability, ensuring that technological progress doesn’t deepen inequalities or ecological harm.

Our Final Thoughts

ChangeNOW 2025 wasn’t just another climate conference—it felt more like a giant meetup of people who actually care and are ready to roll up their sleeves. Yes, we’ve come a long way since the Paris Agreement, but let’s be honest…there’s still a ton to do. We need to walk the talk.

The real takeaway? Change doesn’t happen overnight. It takes teamwork, fresh ideas, and a whole lot of sticking with it. As we look ahead to COP30 and beyond, let’s hold onto the energy from Paris and keep pushing, building, testing, and learning with and from each other. It is not about having all the answers, it’s about building them together through radical collaboration — ditching silos, having the courage to co-create, and realizing that we’re stronger (and faster!) when working together.

Are you ready to join this Movement?

Only together can we turn good intentions into real-world impact at scale!

Let's chat!

The European Commission’s Omnibus Proposal aims to simplify sustainability regulations and boost business competitiveness. While these changes reduce administrative burdens, they also weaken transparency, corporate accountability, and environmental oversight.

With revised reporting thresholds, diluted due diligence, and relaxed carbon policies, the EU risks stepping back from its global leadership in sustainability. But what do these changes really mean for businesses, investors, and the planet? Let’s dive in.

So, what is it all about?

The proposal modifies critical aspects of sustainability legislation, including the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), and the EU Taxonomy. While some argue these changes will make regulations more business-friendly, others see them as a retreat from the EU’s leadership in sustainability.

So, what exactly has changed, and what does it mean for businesses, investors, and the planet?

Simplification promised, simplification delivered! This will make life easier for our businesses while ensuring we stay firmly on course toward our decarbonisation goals.
Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission

Revised Reporting Thresholds – Who’s off the hook?

Under the CSRD, the employee threshold for mandatory sustainability reporting has been raised from 250 to 1,000 employees. This shift exempts approximately 80% of previously covered businesses, significantly reducing the number of companies required to disclose their sustainability impacts.

By narrowing the scope of sustainability reporting, the EU risks weakening corporate accountability and creating a loophole where smaller but still impactful businesses can avoid disclosure.

 

Weakened Due Diligence – A Loophole for Supply Chain Risks?

The Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), initially designed to hold businesses accountable for human rights and environmental risks across their supply chains, has been postponed to 2028. Additionally, the frequency of supplier assessments has been drastically reduced—from annual evaluations across entire supply chains to only once every five years for direct suppliers.

This delay and dilution raise concerns that businesses may deprioritize sustainability and human rights due diligence, reducing the pressure to adopt responsible sourcing practices.

A Simpler Carbon Border Levy – But at what cost?

The Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)—the EU’s tool to level the playing field by taxing high-carbon imports—now introduces a 50-ton annual import threshold. This means that approximately 182,000 importers will be exempt from compliance.

With this exemption, CBAM may lose its bite as a deterrent against high-carbon imports, reducing its effectiveness in incentivizing cleaner global supply chains.

 

EU Taxonomy Dilution – Less Data, More Greenwashing?

The EU Taxonomy, designed to define what qualifies as a sustainable economic activity, is now set to be simplified—reducing the number of required data points by about 70%.

By cutting back on the data required to assess sustainability performance, the EU may be inadvertently lowering the bar for green investments, undermining efforts to direct capital toward genuinely sustainable activities.

Final Thoughts: A Step Back for Sustainability Leadership?

While the Omnibus Proposal is designed to simplify compliance and enhance competitiveness, it risks undermining corporate accountability, sustainability transparency, and environmental progress.

These changes raise questions whether the EU is now prioritizing business-friendly policies at the expense of environmental and social commitments.At a time when climate action and supply chain transparency should be a ccelerating, not slowing down, these rollbacks could allow businesses to sidestep accountability and delay much-needed action

Ready to step up?

It is time to reduce your negative impact, and most importantly make a positive change. We are here to help you on that journey.

Let's chat!

You may have heard or read about it, but just in case you missed it: On June 17, 2024, the European Union Environmental Council (EUEC) gave the final green light for the Nature Restoration Law. A day that will go down in history as a turning point for nature and society. The first law of its kind in the EU to protect and restore Europe’s forests, land, coastlines, lakes, oceans, and overall biodiversity is not only a massive win for nature but also for people. Let’s break down what it is all about.

The making of the Nature Restoration Law

It all started back in June 2022 when the European Commission proposed a law under the biodiversity strategy. After four years of divisive political debate, absurd disinformation campaigns aimed at destroying the proposed law, and mass public mobilizations across numerous sectors defending the integrity of the EU Green Deal, the lengthy process finally concluded with a joyful outcome. The EUEC’s final approval marked the last step for this long-awaited proposal to become law.

Years of twists and turns led to a nail-biting outcome until the very end. Delayed by persistent resistance and lacking a majority vote, it risked being jeopardized after lengthy negotiations. One woman in particular saved the day, as it all came down to a single vote. Leonore Gewessler, Austria’s environment minister, selflessly went against her conservative coalition partners by pledging to back the policy as a last-minute act to achieve a majority vote. Member states followed through with their commitments, and with a majority of 20 countries representing 66.07% of the population, the law was officially endorsed.

I know I will face opposition in Austria, but I am convinced that this is the time to adopt this law.
Leonore Gewessler, Austrian Minister for Climate Action, Environment, Energy, Mobility, Innovation and Technology

So what’s next?

Now that the law is in place, we need all hands on deck. The next step for member states is to allocate the necessary budgets and resources to implement the law’s legally binding restoration targets for the long-term recovery of nature. Additionally, they will outline comprehensive Nature Restoration Plans to meet these obligations, taking their national contexts into account. These plans will be subject to monitoring and reporting before being reviewed by the European Commission.

What does it mean for nature?

Today, over 80% of European habitats are in poor shape—a staggering number that should make us question why past efforts to reverse this worrying trend have been unsuccessful. With this new law, Europe is now poised to lead the way in tackling the climate and biodiversity crises by rehabilitating at least 20% of its land and sea areas by 2030 and all degraded ecosystems by 2050. The EU Nature Restoration Law also includes obligations to:

  • Improve urban green spaces
  • Increase pollinator numbers
  • Enable free-flowing rivers by removing artificial barriers
  • Plant 3 billion additional trees throughout the EU

It is clear that this law is not only about preserving nature but also about ensuring a sustainable future where people and nature thrive together. We cannot fight the climate crisis without addressing the health of our natural environments. Preserving and restoring our unique ecosystems and species is crucial to overcoming the greatest challenges of our time. The question that therefore arises is: what can we do to make a difference?

Do you know about Habitats?

As an impact-driven organization, we’re always looking for ways to maximize our direct and indirect impact. After thorough research on CO2 neutrality, we decided to invest our financial and human resources in what truly matters: our biodiversity. Partnering with other organizations, we launched Habitats, a non-profit network on a mission to start, fund, and scale biodiversity conservation and restoration projects, the number one strategy to mitigate climate change.

The scale and urgency of current global challenges call for effective systemic change. We specialize in identifying and addressing key biodiversity challenges by partnering with a dynamic ecosystem of local organizations and communities. Whether you want to donate as an individual or contribute as a business, we can create or find a tailor-made project based on your needs, geographical scope, and strategy. Reach out if you want to hear more about it!

Ready to stand up for nature?

It is time to reduce your negative impact, and most importantly make a positive change. We are here to help you on that journey.

Let's chat!

The 29th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29), held in Baku, Azerbaijan, has left the world divided over its outcomes. While some hailed the agreements reached as a step forward in the global fight against climate change, others criticized the conference for its lack of ambition, controversies, and missed opportunities. Let’s delve into the key outcomes, highlights, and challenges that defined COP29, exploring whether it was indeed a “Top” or a “Flop.”

Key Outcomes

1. Climate Finance

One of the most significant agreements at COP29 was a commitment from developed nations to mobilize $300 billion annually by 2035 to support developing countries in addressing climate change. This funding aims to help vulnerable nations adapt to climate impacts, transition to renewable energy, and build resilience against climate-related disasters. Even though it may be seen as a step forward, it is simply not enough. The $300 billion pledge falls short of the $1.3 trillion demanded by developing countries. Many nations from the Global South expressed disappointment, arguing that the agreed amount barely scratches the surface of their financial needs. 

The walkout staged by developing countries during negotiations underscored the frustration over what they perceive as a persistent lack of equity in climate finance and insufficient financial commitments from wealthy nations. This dramatic moment highlighted the deep divisions between the Global North and South, a recurring theme in COP negotiations.

2. Global Carbon Market Standards

A long-awaited breakthrough under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement was achieved, as delegates agreed on global standards for carbon markets. These standards aim to ensure that emissions reductions are real, transparent, and verifiable, paving the way for a UN-backed global carbon trading system.

This development is significant as it provides clarity for businesses and countries looking to trade carbon credits, potentially unlocking billions of dollars in climate financing. Yet, critics worry about potential loopholes that could allow “greenwashing” by corporations and nations.

3. Loss and Damage Funding Mechanism

Building on the establishment of the Loss and Damage Fund at COP28, this year’s conference operationalized the fund, outlining how it would be governed and financed. While this is a critical step for countries already grappling with severe climate impacts, questions remain about the sufficiency and accessibility of these funds.

Planet Earth is in critical condition. We have already crossed six planetary boundaries. There is still a window of opportunity for a safe landing for humanity, but this requires a global climate policy process that can deliver change at exponential speed and scale. We need a shift from negotiation to implementation.
Johan Rockström, Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Action Research

Key controversies

1. Host Nation Controversies

Azerbaijan’s selection as host country sparked debate even before COP29 began. As a nation heavily reliant on fossil fuel exports, Azerbaijan faced accusations of using the conference to “greenwash” its image. Critics argued that hosting COP29 in a country with significant environmental and human rights issues undermined the credibility of the conference.

2. Saudi Arabia’s Alleged Text Modifications

Reports surfaced that Saudi Arabia, a key player in global oil markets, attempted to modify official negotiating texts to weaken language around fossil fuel phaseouts. This revelation drew sharp criticism from environmental advocates, who accused Saudi Arabia of undermining the global effort to curb carbon emissions.

3. Calls for COP Reform

The Club of Rome and other organizations called for a reformation of the COP process, suggesting a shift from negotiation to implementation. They argued that the current format, which often centers around high-stakes political bargaining, is ill-suited for the urgent action required to address the climate crisis. These calls gained traction amid growing public discontent over the perceived ineffectiveness of COP meetings.

Looking Ahead: Lessons from COP29

COP29 highlighted both the potential and the limitations of international climate negotiations. On the one hand, the agreements on climate finance and carbon market standards demonstrate that progress is possible. On the other hand, the controversies and unmet expectations underscore the need for a more inclusive, equitable, and ambitious approach.

Was COP29 a “Top” or a “Flop”? The answer depends on your perspective. For some, the conference represented incremental progress in a complex and contentious global process. For others, it was yet another example of missed opportunities and insufficient ambition.

One thing is clear: the urgency of the climate crisis demands bold action, not just promises. As the world prepares for COP30, the lessons of Baku must guide us toward a more effective and equitable approach to tackling the greatest challenge of our time.

Ready to stand up for nature?

It is time to reduce your negative impact, and most importantly make a positive change. We are here to help you on that journey.

Let's chat!

As we step into a new year, sustainability is no longer just a corporate buzzword—it’s a defining factor in business resilience, innovation, and long-term success. From AI-driven solutions to supply chain transparency, companies that stay ahead of these shifts will be the ones leading the transition to a more sustainable economy. So here is a roundup of the key trends shaping sustainability in 2025 and beyond.

1. AI is Supercharging Sustainability

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming the sustainability landscape. From optimizing energy use in buildings to predicting supply chain disruptions, AI is helping companies make smarter, more efficient decisions. In conservation, AI-powered monitoring tools are tracking deforestation and biodiversity loss in real time. Meanwhile, AI-driven data analytics are enhancing sustainability reporting, making it easier for businesses to comply with evolving regulations. However, as AI adoption grows, so does the need for responsible energy use—after all, training large AI models requires significant resources. Businesses will need to ensure that their digital sustainability efforts don’t come at an environmental cost.

2. Circularity is No Longer Optional

The shift from a linear “take-make-waste” economy to circular business models is accelerating. In 2025, companies will be held to even higher standards for reducing waste, reusing materials, and designing products for longevity. Brands that embrace circularity—not just through recycling but through innovative business models like rental, resale, and repair—will gain a competitive edge. Consumers and regulators alike are demanding transparency around materials and product lifecycles, making circular economy strategies a necessity rather than a nice-to-have.

3. Stricter Regulations Are Raising the Bar

Sustainability reporting and compliance are getting tougher. The European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) is now in full force, requiring companies to disclose detailed environmental and social impact data. Meanwhile, other regions are tightening rules on carbon disclosure, supply chain due diligence, and ESG claims. The days of vague sustainability promises are over—companies must now provide quantifiable proof of their commitments. Those that get ahead of compliance rather than scrambling to react will build trust and avoid reputational risks.

There is no business to be done on a dead planet.
David Brower, Prominent environmentalist and Founder of Friends of the Earth

4. Biodiversity is a Boardroom Priority

Biodiversity loss has emerged as a major business risk, and 2025 will see an increasing number of companies integrating nature protection into their sustainability strategies. From deforestation-free supply chains to investments in ecosystem restoration, businesses are recognizing that natural capital is just as critical as financial capital. Governments and investors are also pushing for action, with biodiversity-related financial disclosures gaining traction. Brands that fail to address their impact on nature may soon find themselves facing regulatory scrutiny or consumer backlash. Our foundation Habitats is here to guide you on that journey.

5. Supply Chain Transparency is Non-Negotiable

From fashion to food, supply chain due diligence is becoming a legal requirement rather than a voluntary commitment. Consumers and regulators want to know where materials come from, how workers are treated, and whether production processes align with environmental goals. The digital product passport will become a crucial component. Advances in blockchain and digital tracking systems are helping companies increase visibility, but transparency isn’t just about technology—it requires real accountability. Brands that proactively disclose their sourcing and labor practices will be better positioned to navigate new regulations and build trust with conscious consumers.

The Bottom Line

2025 is the year where sustainability moves from aspiration to obligation. Companies that embed sustainability into their core strategies—not just as an add-on but as a fundamental business principle—will not only meet regulatory demands but also drive innovation, resilience, and long-term success.

Is your business ready?

It is time to reduce your negative impact, and most importantly make a positive change. We are here to help you across these five trends.

Let's chat!

What is CSRd? 

The CSRd came into force on January 5, 2023, and establishes a uniform framework for the reporting of non-financial data for companies based and operating in the European Union. It replaces and builds on the existing Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD) and now puts impact reporting on the same level as financial reporting. Its aim is to advance the scope and quality of sustainability reporting by increasing transparency through comparable non-financial information.

How is it done? 

The twelve European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) within the CSRd are here to ensure that in-scope companies provide reliable, comparable, and relevant sustainability data. They are structured around four thematic reporting areas (strategy, risk and opportunities, metrics and targets, and governance) that represent core elements of how organizations operate. The standards will delve into general requirements and disclosures, expand on ESG topics such as pollution and affected communities, for example, and notably also set out sector-specific information that will be announced later this year (stay tuned by signing up for our newsletter!). More importantly than ever, they will also delve into double materiality.

What about double materiality?

All in all, a materiality assessment refers to identifying the issues that matter most to an organization and determining how important they are. One key factor within the ESRS is adopting the principle of double materiality. It is a holistic approach that prevents one-sided reporting and instead looks at both financial and non-financial impacts. Materiality acknowledges sustainability factors that may affect the company in terms of financial risks and opportunities. It is, therefore, an outside-in perspective that analyzes the impact of the world on a company. Double materiality, on the other hand, includes an inside-out perspective in which one identifies and analyzes the impact that company activities have on people and the planet.

CSRd disclosures will be made publicly available and audited for accuracy and completeness by a third party in a process that can take a significant amount of time. Tailoring a compelling impact report is therefore becoming more important than ever. It is already clear that preparing early for reporting will unearth a range of new opportunities and add a tremendous amount of value to organizations, whether it is to attract new investors that are increasingly prioritizing sustainability to make financial decisions, to set yourself apart from rival businesses with a competitive advantage, or to increase trust and engagement both internally and externally by demonstrating your commitment. Getting started early will allow you to transition to new legislation seamlessly and position your organization ahead of the curve.

How can we help?

From materiality assessment to impact strategy, from B Corp to CSRd compliance, to impact reporting, Quest is here to consult and advise you on the way. Feel free to book a call with us if you would like to have further information on this.

Let's chat