One in a hundred: the Finnish firm that says climate isn’t material

Qt Group takes observers by surprise with the statement in its CSRD report, but garners praise for its honesty

Few companies would publicly state that climate change is not a material risk to their business, but at least one large European firm has done so in its latest sustainability statement.  

Finnish software firm Qt Group identifies 16 material impacts, risks or opportunities (IROs) in the statement, its first under the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). 

But none relate to the environment or climate change. 

On climate, the company says no physical or transition risk it had assessed exceeded its materiality threshold, making it an outlier.  

Recent analysis by ESG software firm Datamaran revealed that, in 99% of CSRD disclosures, at least one climate-related IRO was deemed material. 

Its senior vice president Donato Calace says Qt Group’s position challenges the assumption that climate change is material to every company. 

It also demonstrates the “power” of the double materiality assessment (DMA) required under CSRD, he says.  

When lawmakers introduced the DMA process in 2023, in order to reduce the reporting burden by filtering out less relevant topics at each company, climate change was given a special dispensation. 

Because it is widely understood to be a risk to the entire economy – and an issue most businesses contribute to – if an entity wants to omit climate from its disclosures, it must explain why in its sustainability statement. It cannot simply leave it out.  

Calace says Qt’s decision to do just that shows the DMA process works, and praises Qt for breaking ranks.  

“This is not happening by accident,” he tells Real Economy Progress. 

“There is a conscious decision from the top leadership of this company to say ‘we don’t believe we are impacting positively or negatively on climate, and we don’t believe we have material risk’.” 

But it’s not a definitive position.   

Qt Group stated in its CSRD report that climate “may emerge as a material topic in the coming years if new climate change-related impacts or financial risks or opportunities are identified in the process of updating the double materiality analysis”.  

It also revealed plans to conduct climate scenario analysis this year, admitting that its recent evaluation “did not take climate scenarios into account or assess the sensitivity of the business to risks in more detail”. 

When it comes to how the statements will be perceived by the wider market, Calace says that they may be “controversial”, but should be given consideration. 

“If we’re now sobering up to the point that certain organisations feel confident enough to say climate is not material, I think that’s a positive signal,” he says.  

“We may disagree with Qt’s assessment, but one thing that’s clear is that they’ve been honest. And let’s not forget that CSRD is primarily a transparency directive.”

Qt Group did not respond to multiple requests for comment.