8.4.2026
8.4.2026
CSRD Engineering & Construction Sector Report 2026 - what 43 CSRD reports reveal about engineering & construction sustainability
Event Date:
What you'll find in this report
This report is a structured analysis of what 43 companies actually disclosed in their CSRD reports, including the targets they set, the plans they published, and the gaps they acknowledged.
Finding 1
The sector is splitting, and the gap is widening
Twelve companies have credible, SBTi-validated transition plans with quantified decarbonisation levers and demonstrated progress. Ten have no transition plan at all. The differentiator is not size or geography but instead is specificity.
Finding 2
Scope 3 is where disclosure breaks down
For virtually every company in the sample, Scope 3 represents 85–99% of total emissions. Yet approximately 35 of 43 companies rely entirely on spend-based estimation rather than primary supplier data. The report explains why this matters and what best practice looks like.
Finding 3
SBTi validation is becoming the baseline, not the benchmark
42% of companies hold validated SBTi targets. The absence of engagement no longer reads as a neutral position, but instead invites investor scrutiny. We show who is engaged, who is pending, and who has not started.
Finding 4
Some disclosures are more credible than others
From BAM's no-offset policy to STRABAG's quantity-based materials tracking to Arcadis's 2035 net-zero commitment, the report identifies the practices that set leading reporters apart and the red flags that undermine credibility elsewhere.
Inside the report
- Full materiality analysis across all ESRS topics, with frequency data for all 43 companies
- GHG target summary: who has set targets, what type, and for which scopes
- GHG intensity benchmarking by company size (small, mid-market, large)
- Transition plan maturity tiering: Tier 1 (highly credible), Tier 2 (credible with caveats), Tier 3 (early stage or no plan)
- Best practice section: nine companies named for disclosure approaches worth benchmarking
- Red flags and reporting gaps: the most common weaknesses across the sample
- Notable quotes pulled directly from CSRD filings, including companies that openly acknowledge they have not met the standard
Who this is for
Investors and fund managers
The first CSRD cycle gives you richer data than you have ever had on portfolio and prospective companies, but it requires careful interpretation. This report tells you what to look for, what to discount, and which companies carry the highest disclosure risk.
Sustainability and reporting teams
If your company is in scope for CSRD, or preparing to be, this report shows where the bar is being set and where peers are falling short. The best practice section is designed to be used directly in internal discussions.
Finance and risk professionals
Scope 3 methodology choices, baseline year changes, and target downgrades all affect how you should read reported emissions. We explain the most common ways disclosures mislead and how to identify them.
About the research
All data in this report was extracted from the sustainability report sections of publicly available CSRD filings. No survey data or self-reported questionnaires. What companies wrote in their mandatory disclosures and analysed systematically across 43 companies, 13 countries, and three reporting years.
The full library of CSRD disclosures referenced in this report, covering 944 reports across 38 countries and 13 SASB industry sectors, is available at the KEY ESG CSRD Reports Vault.
Ready to see how KEY ESG supports CSRD compliance?
KEY ESG is a sustainability reporting and data management platform built for private equity investors and their portfolio companies, as well as standalone companies.
Our platform handles the data collection, double materiality workflow, and ESRS-aligned reporting that makes the difference between a credible disclosure and a problematic one.
Download the report now
Click on the image to download the full report - no registration required.
Navigation
Section
What you'll find in this report
This report is a structured analysis of what 43 companies actually disclosed in their CSRD reports, including the targets they set, the plans they published, and the gaps they acknowledged.
Finding 1
The sector is splitting, and the gap is widening
Twelve companies have credible, SBTi-validated transition plans with quantified decarbonisation levers and demonstrated progress. Ten have no transition plan at all. The differentiator is not size or geography but instead is specificity.
Finding 2
Scope 3 is where disclosure breaks down
For virtually every company in the sample, Scope 3 represents 85–99% of total emissions. Yet approximately 35 of 43 companies rely entirely on spend-based estimation rather than primary supplier data. The report explains why this matters and what best practice looks like.
Finding 3
SBTi validation is becoming the baseline, not the benchmark
42% of companies hold validated SBTi targets. The absence of engagement no longer reads as a neutral position, but instead invites investor scrutiny. We show who is engaged, who is pending, and who has not started.
Finding 4
Some disclosures are more credible than others
From BAM's no-offset policy to STRABAG's quantity-based materials tracking to Arcadis's 2035 net-zero commitment, the report identifies the practices that set leading reporters apart and the red flags that undermine credibility elsewhere.
Inside the report
- Full materiality analysis across all ESRS topics, with frequency data for all 43 companies
- GHG target summary: who has set targets, what type, and for which scopes
- GHG intensity benchmarking by company size (small, mid-market, large)
- Transition plan maturity tiering: Tier 1 (highly credible), Tier 2 (credible with caveats), Tier 3 (early stage or no plan)
- Best practice section: nine companies named for disclosure approaches worth benchmarking
- Red flags and reporting gaps: the most common weaknesses across the sample
- Notable quotes pulled directly from CSRD filings, including companies that openly acknowledge they have not met the standard
Who this is for
Investors and fund managers
The first CSRD cycle gives you richer data than you have ever had on portfolio and prospective companies, but it requires careful interpretation. This report tells you what to look for, what to discount, and which companies carry the highest disclosure risk.
Sustainability and reporting teams
If your company is in scope for CSRD, or preparing to be, this report shows where the bar is being set and where peers are falling short. The best practice section is designed to be used directly in internal discussions.
Finance and risk professionals
Scope 3 methodology choices, baseline year changes, and target downgrades all affect how you should read reported emissions. We explain the most common ways disclosures mislead and how to identify them.
About the research
All data in this report was extracted from the sustainability report sections of publicly available CSRD filings. No survey data or self-reported questionnaires. What companies wrote in their mandatory disclosures and analysed systematically across 43 companies, 13 countries, and three reporting years.
The full library of CSRD disclosures referenced in this report, covering 944 reports across 38 countries and 13 SASB industry sectors, is available at the KEY ESG CSRD Reports Vault.
Ready to see how KEY ESG supports CSRD compliance?
KEY ESG is a sustainability reporting and data management platform built for private equity investors and their portfolio companies, as well as standalone companies.
Our platform handles the data collection, double materiality workflow, and ESRS-aligned reporting that makes the difference between a credible disclosure and a problematic one.
Download the report now
Click on the image to download the full report - no registration required.
