BIP.Verco: Is the Business Case for Climate Action Broken?
Andrew is a Director at BIP.Verco with nearly two decades of experience in decarbonisation and industrial sustainability. He began his career with a strong engineering foundation, delivering process optimisation, resource efficiency and energy system improvements across manufacturing facilities worldwide.
Today, Andrew works with complex organisations to address their most challenging climate issues. His experience spans site‑level decarbonisation, particularly in areas such as industrial heat, through to the development of enterprise‑wide climate strategies, capital investment plans, and Scope 3 reporting systems.
At Sustainability LIVE: The Leadership Summit at London Climate Action Week, Andrew will host a workshop titled - Is the Business Case for Climate Action Broken? alongside James Edney, Head of Sector, Growth at BIP.Verco.
The workshop will be a candid peer debate for sustainability leaders who want to make stronger business cases for climate action and decarbonisation. This session challenges sustainability leaders to examine why traditional ROI framing can fail to move boards and provides an opportunity to share their learnings and experiences with peers.
Andrew shares his insights ahead of the event.
How has the business case for sustainability and decarbonisation changed over the past 1–5 years?
I think it has changed in two important ways.
First, it has gone mainstream. Five years ago, a lot of the conversation was still about reputation, compliance or doing the right thing. Today, most business leaders see sustainability and decarbonisation much more clearly through a commercial lens. It is no longer a side conversation. It is increasingly part of how businesses think about performance.
Second, even though the case is stronger, it is often harder to land. Many of the simpler efficiency wins have already been taken, so the next wave of action is more complex.
It involves bigger capital decisions, more supply chain dependency, more operational change and more uncertainty around energy markets, policy and delivery. So the importance of the topic has increased just as the case has become harder to prove in a way that gets decisions made.
Why do business leaders need to strengthen the business cases for climate action and decarbonisation?
Because if they do not, progress slows down.
The easier projects tend to get approved. The more strategic and transformational ones often do not, unless the case is framed properly. If decarbonisation is presented as a sustainability issue alone, it can struggle to compete for attention and capital. If it is successfully framed as a business issue linked to topics such as resilience, energy volatility, competitiveness, customer expectations or access to capital, it can become an easier conversation.
There is also now a bigger penalty for weak business cases. The cost of inaction is no longer theoretical. It shows up in energy price exposure, supply chain disruption, regulatory pressure and, increasingly, in whether the business is actually positioned for where its market is heading. Strengthening the business case is really about making sure climate action is treated as business strategy, not something sitting alongside it.
What are the top challenges and levers for business leaders who want to deliver a strong business case for climate action and decarbonisation?
One of the biggest challenges is that traditional ROI framing is often too narrow. It works for some energy efficiency projects, but it is a poor test for broader decarbonisation decisions. If the conversation is reduced to short payback periods, businesses can end up rejecting actions that are strategically important because the value sits in resilience, risk reduction or future readiness rather than in a simple near-term return.
The second challenge is data, but probably not in the way people usually mean it. A lot of organisations assume the answer is more data or better data. Sometimes it is. But often the deeper issue is whether the data is being translated into something decision-useful.
The real question is not just whether you can measure emissions or energy use more accurately. It is whether you can connect that information to cost, risk, operational performance and investment decisions in a way that matters to the board.
The third challenge is uncertainty, especially around energy. Price volatility has fundamentally changed how businesses think about procurement and resilience. Even where average prices have eased, volatility remains a real issue, and that makes long-term cases harder to model with confidence.
It also means businesses need to get more comfortable with scenario-based thinking rather than waiting for a perfect forecast that never comes.
What are the three pieces of advice you would give a sustainability leader preparing their next business case to make it as effective as possible?
First, start with the commercial issue, not the sustainability topic:
If you begin with carbon, you may struggle to get attention. If you begin with cost exposure, resilience, regulatory pressure, customer expectations or growth, you are far more likely to get a serious hearing. The strongest business cases are anchored in the priorities the business already cares about.
Second, widen the definition of value:
Do not rely on simple ROI alone. Include avoided costs, supply resilience, energy security, regulatory preparedness and longer-term strategic position. Some of the most important benefits of decarbonisation are real, but they do not always show up neatly in a narrow payback calculation.
Third, come to the workshop:
This is exactly what we will be discussing at Sustainability LIVE: The Leadership Summit 2026. We will be looking at why business cases for sustainability are becoming more difficult, where traditional approaches fall short, and what leaders can do to make them more decision-useful and more effective. If this is something you are wrestling with in your organisation, I would encourage you to join us on 25 June at CodeNode London and be part of the discussion.
