Australia has talked about mandatory sustainability reporting for many years. Now, its largest companies are rushing towards their first deadline. 

Australia’s climate disclosure regime began on 1 January 2025, starting with group 1 companies, comprising roughly the top 1350 entities by revenue, assets or emissions profile. In absolute numbers, it’s a much wider net than that cast in New Zealand, where 170 listed companies, insurers, banks and fund managers have reported since 2023.

Whether you’re counting profits or emissions, all reporting is about data. How are large commercial and enterprise businesses pulling together all the data required to meet their obligations under the AASB S2-based regime? And what lessons can the Australians take from the New Zealand experience?

Growing pains

Most Australian group 1 companies are already deep in preparation. What’s clear from speaking to several large reporters is that few are rushing to adopt new software systems just yet. 

“You shouldn’t be making big investment decisions in carbon accounting or data management systems until you know what data you need,” says Nick Kamper, CEO of Sydney-based Purpose Bureau, an environmental, social, and governance (ESG) data supplier.

Most companies are instead focused on getting a clear view of their emissions data, particularly for scope 3, using consultants and internal teams, with the information often stitched together with spreadsheets and manual workarounds.

The first time around is the most painful. You’re finding all the systems that hold relevant data, building processes to collect and review that data, calculating emissions from incomplete records or using industry averages to build a baseline picture across every department and location. One major Australian bank is running its internal processes as though it was reporting under the 2026 standard already, knowing the learning curve will be steep.

“We are figuring it out as we go. A lot of the work is still manual spreadsheets,” says an ESG lead at an Australian enterprise retailer, commenting anonymously as he was not authorised to speak publicly. 

This reflects the experience across multiple sectors – banking, retail, mining, construction – where sustainability teams are running first-time reporting cycles to identify gaps and define boundaries to understand the requirements.

Sustainability executives explain the first step is to get all the pieces of reporting onto the table, work out what is material, identify low-hanging fruit and optimise the process. Only after running the activity once could they know what tools may help streamline and improve their work. 

There’s also the issue of capacity. 

“They’re too busy doing [the work] to do a system implementation,” says Karen McWilliams FCA, sustainability and business reform leader at CA ANZ. 

Even within companies that have been working on ESG for several years, scope 1 and 2 emissions are only now being systematised, often through property or facilities management software, ESG platforms or consultants. But scope 3 – which includes indirect emissions from suppliers, customers and value chain partners – is proving far more difficult.

In New Zealand, where climate reporting is already in force, many firms also began with spreadsheets and consultants. Now, with two years of disclosures behind them, some are turning their attention to software options to improve auditability and reduce manual reconciliation between business units.

But whether you’re in Auckland or Adelaide, the current state is much the same: manual-heavy, process-focused and only just starting to transition to scalable tools.

Emerging solutions

Although few enterprise companies have committed to a single ESG platform, there’s a growing awareness of the types of software that will be required, particularly as assurance requirements kick in.

The climate reporting tech landscape separates into four functional categories built around the three emissions scopes and climate risk. Within those categories, the software tools fall into four types. 

Carbon accounting software calculates and tracks emissions across scopes. This increases in complexity as you move from scope 1 to scope 3.

Scope 1 covers direct emissions from sources company owned or controlled, for example, industrial processes, gas or fuel consumed by company vehicles. Scope 2 refers to indirect emissions from purchased electricity, steam, heating and cooling. For small businesses operating from a single premises, scope 2 reporting can be as simple as exporting the kilowatt hours of usage for each month over the course of a year.

Group 1 companies, however, need to consolidate the electricity consumption across all their warehouses, headquarters, branch offices and retail shops. Energy consumption and management software can track the power usage for multiple facilities to understand the costs of doing business. This software can also tally up the kilowatt hours across all premises for a set period.

Still, the legwork for collecting data in scope 1 and scope 2 is a mere preamble compared with the work required for scope 3. Scope 3 is most commonly referred to as emissions from your value chain – the long list of suppliers that you use to create and deliver products and services.

The category is more accurately described as ‘counterparty’ rather than just ‘value chain’, as it includes both customers and suppliers. This is because sectors like financial services need to calculate the emissions of their loans and investments. For example, a bank reporting scope 3 emissions must estimate the emissions intensity of the businesses it lends to, while an insurer must account for climate exposure across its underwriting portfolio.

In response to this complexity, software platforms are emerging to address different parts of the scope 3 problem. 

Carbon accounting software often supports the initial data modelling, while procurement platforms can help improve data collection across supplier networks. However, both rely heavily on self-reported or estimated data. 

More recently, organisations have turned to counterparty intelligence platforms that provide verified emissions profiles for third parties, similar to how a credit bureau reports on financial risk. These platforms are particularly useful in contexts where assurance is required and reliable third-party data is essential.

Climate risk software is a fourth and growing category, required to meet the climate-related risk disclosures mandated by reporting standards such as IFRS S2. These tools help companies understand how climate change could impact their operations, assets or value chain. 

They typically fall into two camps: geospatial risk platforms that map physical hazards such as floods or bushfires onto a company’s asset footprint, and scenario modelling tools which estimate how business performance might be affected under various climate and policy futures. Some firms are already working with insurers or climate modellers to integrate these insights into their reporting process.

Mandatory disclosure requirements needs software that supports not just emissions calculations, but also transparency, auditability and financial integration.

---

ESG software comparisons

Here’s what some vendors in the local market offer large enterprises.

Tool	Vendor	Country of origin	Market focus	Sustainability modules	Data scope	Reporting and analytics features
BraveGen Carbon	BraveGen	New Zealand	New Zealand and Australian organisations, mid-market to enterprise	Carbon accounting, scope 3 reporting and supplier engagement, building performance software, reduction planning and monitoring, dashboards	Scope 1, 2, 3	Dashboards, data validation, audit‑ready reporting, task tracking, export tools
Envizi	IBM	Australia	Global enterprises, available in Australia and New Zealand via partners	Emissions management, financed emissions, supply chain intelligence, building ratings and benchmarks, climate risk insights	Scope 1, 2, 3	Planning, sustainability program tracking, utility bill and interval meter analytics, ESG reporting frameworks
Oracle Fusion Cloud EPM for Sustainability	Oracle	US	Global enterprise clients on Oracle Fusion	Data collection and aggregation, machine learning (ML) modelling, auditability and compliance, real-time tracking	Scope 1, 2, 3	Multiple reporting frameworks, sustainability planning, predictive forecasting
Purpose Bureau	Purpose Bureau	Australia	Global, with offices in Australia, New Zealand and Europe	Scope 3 emissions including direct emissions from suppliers and customers, climate risk, modern slavery	Scope 3, customer/financed emissions	Dashboards, scope 3 emissions inventory, decarbonisation forecasting, climate risk modelling, modern slavery risk assessment, entity and portfolio level reports
Watershed	Watershed Inc.	US	Global, with office in Sydney	Management and tracking for emissions, water, waste and pollution; automated report builder, environmental data database, carbon removal marketplace	Scope 1, 2, 3	Reduction planning and forecasting, benchmarking, target tracking

 

---

ESG tech frontrunners

When it comes to choosing ESG software, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. The tools currently available vary significantly in terms of focus, depth and maturity. What follows is a snapshot of how some of the better-known platforms stack up at a high level, based on market feedback and interviews.

Australian-born Envizi, now part of IBM, is one of the most established ESG data management platforms in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region. It has a long-standing focus on helping asset-intensive organisations manage their carbon and energy data. 

It excels in scope 1 and 2 emissions tracking by automating the collection and aggregation of internal data from utilities, building management systems, fuel usage and metering infrastructure across large property portfolios or infrastructure-heavy operations. 

Envizi’s strength lies in handling high volumes of structured data, making it especially useful for companies with complex energy footprints and multiple sites. The platform includes robust tools for data quality assurance, trend analysis and performance benchmarking, allowing organisations to identify energy efficiency opportunities and track progress against reduction targets. 

It supports major reporting standards such as global reporting initiative (GRI), carbon disclosure project (CDP) and ISSB, and includes compliance modules to help teams prepare for audits and external disclosures.

BraveGen, New Zealand’s leading enterprise carbon accounting and sustainability platform, is increasingly active in the Australian market. It provides a cloud-based enterprise carbon accounting suite tailored for organisations with complex emissions profiles, such as universities, airports, large property portfolios and infrastructure-heavy operations. 

BraveGen automates collection of emissions for all three scopes through integrations with utility meters, enterprise resource planning (ERP) or procurement systems, digital supplier surveys and self-service portals for third-party data. 

Its toolkit includes BraveGen Carbon for emissions accounting; BraveGen Utility for electricity, gas and water usage tracking with AI-driven fault detection; and BraveGen View: live dashboards that visualise performance and promote stakeholder engagement. 

The system supports compliance reporting frameworks such as ISO, greenhouse gases (GHG), CDP, GRI and regional regulatory regimes by automating report generation, collating evidence and surfacing upcoming compliance deadlines.

US-based Watershed is an enterprise-grade ESG platform designed to streamline carbon accounting and regulatory reporting. It collects emissions data across all three scopes by integrating with internal systems such as ERP, finance, travel, procurement and utility platforms. Watershed automates data collection and normalisation to produce audit-ready emissions reports that comply with standards like the ISSB’s IFRS S2 and the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). 

The software includes compliance tracking features that monitor global disclosure requirements and maintain a centralised calendar of key reporting deadlines. It alerts users in advance of reporting milestones and outlines the specific data points and documentation required for each regulation, helping teams avoid last-minute scrambles. 

Watershed also supports granular scope 3 calculations by ingesting supplier-specific data where available, or using high-quality emissions factors when direct data is unavailable. Built-in controls support assurance and audit workflows, enabling sustainability and finance teams to collaborate on ESG disclosures with confidence.

Purpose Bureau takes a different approach: it is the sustainability version of a credit bureau. Rather than tracking credit standing, it tracks verified emissions data for a company’s suppliers, customers or borrowers. 

This is particularly valuable for organisations with large scope 3 exposure, such as banks and insurers, or anyone needing auditable third-party data without chasing down suppliers directly.

Purpose Bureau claims to collect data on every Australian firm’s sustainability accreditations, carbon reduction commitments and ‘sustainability conscientiousness’. It also identifies suppliers that don’t have these frameworks in place and need more assistance to generate the required information. This way, organisations can help reduce their scope 3 emissions by pushing suppliers to measure and reduce their emissions.

Companies can integrate the Purpose Bureau database into their ERP or management systems to calculate client and supplier emissions more easily.

As expected in a nascent industry, there are dozens of competitor applications in the US and EU. Companies such as Emitwise, Persefoni, Sinai Technologies and Unravel Carbon have strong global brands but little presence in Australia or New Zealand at present. (None responded to interview requests for this article.)

ERP bolt-ons

Carbon accounting is now an extension of financial accounting. Our financial systems of record already contain lists of suppliers and customers, and the products and services they have delivered or received. Consequently, ERP vendors are also gearing up to solve the sustainability reporting challenge. 

One example is Oracle Fusion Cloud EPM for Sustainability (aka Oracle ESG. EPM: enterprise performance management), which is part of Oracle’s broader finance and ERP suite. It positions itself as an environmental accounting solution that bridges financial and sustainability data within a single integrated platform. 

It’s designed to appeal to organisations already in the Oracle ecosystem by aligning ESG metrics with enterprise financial systems, enabling carbon and environmental data to be treated with the same rigour as with traditional accounting. 

The platform helps users to track emissions across all three scopes by combining operational data with procurement, travel and utility records stored within Oracle ERP. 

Its key difference is the ability to connect ESG performance directly to financial outcomes such as cost centres, budgets and capital allocations. This makes it well suited for CFO-led ESG strategies aiming to embed sustainability into core business planning. 

Test, learn, improve

For Australia’s group 1 companies, the remainder of this financial year will be focused on pulling together the best possible set of numbers ahead of their first end-of-year reporting deadline. It’s a scramble against time to establish a baseline.

Once that milestone is passed, there’ll be an opportunity to take a step back, review what worked and what didn’t, and start thinking about how to improve the process next time. That’s when serious decisions about systems, data strategy and software investment are likely to follow.

---

Explore more resources

For the CA ANZ update, ‘Climate-Related Disclosures: Key Developments’, click here 

For more expert advice on climate-related disclosures for different business types and sizes, visit CA ANZ’s Sustainability Resource Centre