What Australian Companies Can Learn from NZ’s Climate Reporting Reality

“We thought we were almost there.” 

That’s what I heard from many businesses in New Zealand as they prepared their first mandatory climate disclosures.

They had emissions inventories. Some had published sustainability reports. A few even had board papers discussing climate risk.

But once we tested their readiness against the standard, critical gaps emerged.

What We Uncovered

Despite good intent, most organisations weren’t genuinely prepared to disclose climate-related financial risks and opportunities in line with the standard. Common gaps included:

• Governance ambiguity No clear owner for climate risk, confusion between sustainability, finance, and risk functions.

• Financial disconnect Climate was seen as an environmental issue, not something that shapes revenue, cost, or capital allocation.

• Scenario design flaws Often copied from templates, overly optimistic, or too vague to be meaningful.

• Internal silos Risk, finance, and sustainability teams were not working together. This slowed decisions and created conflicting narratives.

The Temptation: “We’ve Got This”

For many mid-sized Australian companies, the temptation to go it alone is understandable.

After all, Australian Sustainability Reporting Standards (ASRS) requirements phase in gradually. Perhaps you already track emissions. Maybe your risk register includes climate change. You might even have passionate internal champions ready to take the lead.

But here’s the paradox I witnessed across the Tasman:

“The more a company tries to go it alone on climate reporting, the more exposed it becomes.”

What feels like control managing your own narrative, keeping costs down can become a strategic vulnerability.

Why? Because like New Zealand’s Climate Related Disclosures (NZ CS 1), the ASRS isn’t just about disclosing emissions.

It’s about linking climate to strategy, governance, risk, and financial planning. It’s a whole-of-business disclosure that touches the boardroom, finance team, operations, investor relations, customers and more. That includes global supply chains, which are now being scrutinised for emissions, resilience, and ethical risk. What once sat in the background of procurement conversations is now front and centre in climate reporting.

And crucially, to comply, companies must assess at least two climate scenarios typically one aligned to a “below 2°C world” (such as the IEA Net Zero 2050 pathway), and one high-emissions scenario that reflects limited climate action and more severe physical risks.

These scenarios aren’t just regulatory checkboxes they help you stress-test your business strategy against divergent futures.

Trying to do this internally without guidance is like peering into a snow globe and trying to model how a hurricane will impact your supply chain. The lens is too narrow, too distorted and can be detached from reality.

The Difference: Those Who Sought Support Early

Companies that sought external advice early whether through peer benchmarking, advisory support, or readiness assessments were significantly better positioned to:

• Strengthen internal capability

• Avoid duplication and inefficiencies

• Deliver a credible report that built investor confidence and internal alignment

  
  

What ASRS-Reporting Companies Should Do Now

If your company falls under the ASRS regime whether in the first wave or just outside it the time to prepare is now. Based on what we’ve seen in New Zealand, early action can prevent costly rework and reputational missteps.

Here’s what I recommend:

1. Start with a structured readiness assessment Diagnose before you design. Find the gaps before you try to fill them.

2. Bring finance in early ASRS is not just for the sustainability team. It’s a financial disclosure. Engage finance early to shape data, assumptions, and governance.

3. Avoid treating this as an ESG side project Climate is a strategic issue. Reporting under ASRS belongs in risk and strategy not just sustainability.

4. Get external perspective Peer reviews, benchmarking, or assurance can help you identify blind spots before your board or auditor does.

5. Treat your first report as a foundation, not a finish line This is your starting point. Build a credible baseline and a plan to improve year-on-year.

“The purpose of ASRS isn’t red tape. It’s about building resilient, future-ready businesses.”

Mindset Matters

Across both New Zealand and Australia, I’ve seen firsthand how mindset shapes outcomes.

Companies that approached climate reporting as a compliance box-tick often ended up behind schedule, over budget, and underwhelming. Their reports lacked credibility and their teams burned out.

In contrast, those that treated it as a strategic lens built capability, clarified risk, uncovered efficiencies and opportunities. They made smarter investment decisions and often found competitive advantage in the process.

"Climate reporting is not a PR exercise. It’s a public demonstration of governance, foresight, and integrity."

Let’s Get This Right

At ESG Strategy, we don’t just write reports we co-author them with you. Using our proven Triple C Framework, Confidence, Commitment, and Consistency we coach your team, build internal capability, and lay the right foundations so your organisation can lead the process in future years. Our goal is to help you move beyond compliance: to build confidence, learn as you go, and embed climate reporting as a strategic capability, not just a regulatory obligation.

Want to Chat?

If you’re preparing for ASRS or just want a second opinion on where you stand, I’d love to help. Book a no-obligation chat here, sometimes all it takes is a 30-minute conversation to avoid six months of rework.