From Promises to Proof: What COP30 means for corporate climate strategy

The climate conversation is becoming more fractured and more consequential than ever. COP30 underdelivered on its national climate commitments to combat global warming. The UN now projects that global temperatures are almost certain to exceed the 1.5°C threshold established by the Paris Agreement. Even voices like Bill Gates are recalibrating their narrative on climate action, placing greater emphasis on funding for climate adaptation over meeting near-term emissions targets. 

Against this backdrop, growing hostility toward climate policy, particularly in major economies like the U.S., has fueled widespread "greenhushing," as companies pull back from public sustainability communications even while continuing to act behind the scenes. Those maintaining their climate goals face shifting standards and ongoing revisions to major corporate frameworks, creating uncertainty around how to measure and report progress. The lack of clear, consistent rules leaves business leaders under intensifying scrutiny from investors, regulators, and consumers alike.

Yet if there's a consistent thread running through today's climate discourse, it's this: we're moving beyond the era of climate commitments. The era of climate credibility has begun.

At Penta, our latest sentiment analysis across media, policy, and public conversations shows how this shift is playing out. It reveals where companies are gaining reputational traction and where they're quietly losing trust. The emerging leaders won't just be those with ambitious targets—they'll be the ones demonstrating how their actions deliver tangible benefits for people and communities.

The Trust Shift: From Targets to Tangible Impact

For years, climate leadership was measured by merely setting ambitious targets: net-zero by 2040, renewable by 2030, plastic-free by 2025. Those targets continue to play an important role in the world, but they can feel abstract without companies reporting consistent, measured progress toward these goals. In a world facing real-time climate impacts — floods, heatwaves, supply chain collapse, and growing health risks – this progress only becomes more important.

Today, stakeholders are demanding proof, not just pledges. Proof against progress - and in many cases proof of the financial, societal and human benefits. And that's showing up clearly in reputational performance.

Companies tying their climate work to human outcomes like clean air, food security, or health equity are outperforming their peers. Unilever's work on seed resilience in Pakistan, GSK's malaria vaccine rollout, and Bayer's partnerships supporting smallholder farmers are all earning positive sentiment because they link climate adaptation to human wellbeing.

One of the most significant shifts in the narrative? Health is emerging as a new frontline of climate storytelling. Climate is no longer just an emissions issue, it is being reframed as a public health, labor, and survival issue. Companies that respond with integrated, people-centered strategies are finding new avenues for trust and influence.

The Visibility Gap: Technical Wins, Missed Narratives

The reputational landscape isn't just shaped by action, it's shaped by perception. And too many technically strong companies are underperforming on that front.

Our research shows that firms like Novartis, Holcim, and McCain Foods have legitimate, high-impact climate initiatives. But they suffer from low narrative visibility and cut-through in the media landscape. In other words, their work is overlooked while louder, often less impactful actors are more prominent in the public square.

The lesson? Credibility without visibility won't cut it. CCOs and CMOs should be prioritizing their narrative strategy with the same rigor they apply to their emissions targets. That means framing Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) not as an obligation, but as a source of human value and business resilience.

ESG in a Fractured World: Nationalism, Narrative, and Navigating the Divide

While some companies are stepping up, others are getting caught in geopolitical crosscurrents, especially when climate action touches food supply, land use, or energy security.

Despite Tesco's operational progress, it was hit with reputational backlash over farmer protests and supply chain sourcing, issuing  a stark reminder that domestic sentiment can trump global ESG positioning.

This mirrors a broader challenge: climate and ESG strategies are increasingly being interpreted through nationalistic, even populist, lenses. Food sovereignty, energy independence, and economic equity are reshaping how stakeholders judge climate credibility.

For comms leaders, this means ESG storytelling must flex across markets and take complex and often-times conflicting international perspectives into consideration.

What CCOs and CMOs Should Do Next

In this environment, climate strategy can't be confined to the sustainability team. If it is core to your organizational strategy and business success, then it is a brand imperative. A reputational differentiator. And a test of corporate leadership.

Here are three strategic priorities for comms and brand leaders coming out of COP30:

• Reframe ESG around co-benefits. Show how your climate work supports public health, economic resilience, and food security. The most resonant narratives are intersectional.
• Fix the visibility gap. If you're doing the right work, make sure your audiences know it — through storytelling, partnerships, and proof points that move sentiment, not just metrics.
• Build coalitions, not campaigns. From cross-sector alliances to community partnerships, collaboration is now a reputational multiplier. Companies that operate in silos are losing the narrative.

The companies that emerge with momentum will be those that translate resilience into influence. Not only through press releases, goals, or promises. But with stories, data, and partnerships that show how their climate strategy translates to progress.