Facts & Figures from the 2025 CoP: Where are Swiss and Liechtenstein participants on their sustainability journey?
- 4 days ago
- 5 min read
Every year, the Communication on Progress (CoP) gives us a window into how UN Global Compact participants are translating their sustainability commitments into practice. The 2025 period brought in 11'529 submissions globally, with 178 coming from companies part of the UN Global Compact Network Switzerland and Liechtenstein (GCNSL). All figures in this article are drawn from those GCNSL submissions.
This year's data tells an interesting story about who is doing the reporting. A significant share of our participants are small and medium enterprises (SMEs), and 42% of them rely on the CoP as their sole reporting mechanism. For these businesses, submitting a CoP is their primary vehicle for structuring and communicating their sustainability journey, which makes the quality of that engagement all the more meaningful.
Also worth noting is how companies are reporting. While most UN Global Compact participants globally use the CoP questionnaire, GCNSL participants are proportionally more likely to submit a standalone sustainability report, with the split sitting at roughly 62.5% CoP questionnaire submissions versus 37.5% report uploads. GRI is the most widely used reporting framework among those companies that have a sustainability report other than the CoP.
So, what does the substance of those reports actually tell us? Below, we take a closer look at what the 2025 data shows us across the four thematic areas of the Ten Principles.
Governance
Strong governance is what turns sustainability commitments on paper into decisions that actually shape how a business operates. As regulatory expectations grow and supply chains become more challenging to oversee, the question is no longer whether to have governance structures in place, but rather how well they are working.
The good news from this year's data is that the structural foundations are largely there. Most GCNSL participants have due diligence processes, codes of conduct, and designated leaders responsible for one of the sustainability topics at the highest level, as seen in the graphics below. These are not trivial achievements, particularly for SMEs.
What is more striking, and perhaps more telling, is the gap when it comes to executive incentives. Across all four sustainability pillars, only a small minority of businesses have linked executive pay to sustainability performance. When sustainability efforts are not reflected in how leadership is evaluated and rewarded, even the most well-designed structures can remain somewhat theoretical. This may be one of the more consequential areas for GCNSL companies to examine as they look to deepen their impact and reinforce long-term value creation.
Human & Labour Rights
Human rights and labour rights are areas where most GCNSL participants have done meaningful work at the policy level. Looking at the data below, it is clear that topics like workplace safety, non-discrimination, and data privacy are being taken seriously, with high rates of formal policy commitment across the board.
Where things get more interesting is the gap between having a policy and taking action. Capacity building within business relationships is the most common form of concrete action, which reflects a growing awareness that risk does not stop at the company's front door. Supply chains and business partnerships are where many human and labour rights impacts occur, and companies appear to be responding to that.
At the same time, collective action with external stakeholders remain strikingly low across most topics. For management looking to enhance their human and labour rights efforts, external engagement may be worth a closer look.
Environment
Environmental issues have moved firmly into the territory of business risk, and the data seen below suggests that most GCNSL participants are responding with at least some level of policy commitment. Energy and resource use, waste management, and climate change are the topics attracting the most attention, which broadly tracks with where market and European regulatory pressure is currently highest.
What is less encouraging is the picture of climate adaptation. While many companies have policies addressing environment-related issues, a significant share has not yet developed a concrete climate adaptation plan. Simultaneously, formal pressures have been removed in the EU with the revised reporting standard ESRS E1 - a direct consequence of the EU Omnibus Package 1, which will also impact Swiss and Liechtenstein companies. Those in scope are no longer required to disclose a transition plan for climate change mitigation, frequently interconnected with climate adaptation. However, given that physical climate risks, from extreme weather to supply chain disruption, are increasingly affecting business operations across all sectors, this is a gap that carries real strategic implications. Planning for adaptation is not just about resilience - it is increasingly a question that investors, insurers, and business partners are asking.
It is also worth noting that collective action on environmental issues remains low, mirroring the pattern seen in human and labour rights. Internal training is by far the most common response across all environmental topics.
Anti-Corruption
On anti-corruption, GCNSL participants are in a relatively strong position. A clear majority have formal compliance programmes in place, and most of those that invest in training make it available to all employees rather than limiting it to specific roles or levels. This is a meaningful baseline.
The areas requiring more attention are at the edges of the programme, particularly with regard to third-party relationships and collective action. Extending anti-corruption training and due diligence to suppliers, contractors, and consultants remains less common than might be expected, given that third-party relationships are among the most significant corruption risk vectors for internationally operating businesses.
Collective action against corruption, such as engaging with industry peers or civil society to address structural risks in specific markets or sectors, is also very limited among GCNSL participants. Only one in five currently engages in collective action against corruption, while it is not seen as a current priority for the majority. This is not necessarily surprising, but it represents a real opportunity. Corruption is, by definition, a problem that no single business can solve on its own, and the businesses that engage beyond their own operations are better positioned to influence the broader environment in which they operate.
The 2025 data presents a picture of participants who have built genuine sustainability infrastructure but are still working out how to make full use of it. Policies, codes of conduct, and due diligence processes are increasingly in place. The next steps, whether that means more incentives for executives, broader external engagement, or more proactive climate adaptation planning, are where the real differentiation will happen in the years ahead.
By sharing this data, we hope to inspire more businesses to engage deeply with the Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact and to learn from each other. We hope these findings offer a useful reference point, whether you are benchmarking your own progress or simply curious about where your peers stand. If you wish to dig deeper into the data, the CoP Data Visualization Tool is available to the public. Participants are able to access a personalised benchmark when logged into their account.
Transparency is the first step toward transformation, and together, we can move toward a more just, inclusive, and sustainable future.
About the Communication on Progress
The Communication on Progress (CoP) is the accountability mechanism of the UN Global Compact. It is an annual and mandatory requirement for all business participants of the UN Global Compact. The submission period for the mandatory 2026 Communication on Progress (CoP) opens on 1 April 2026 and closes on 31 July 2026.
Contact for CoP-related questions
Tabea Böglin
Programmes Manager–Social Sustainability, ESG Reporting and Regulations