Integrated transition planning: the future of transition planning

WBCSD and ERM have published the report ‘Integrated transition planning: Business case, early steps, actions and guidance’ (13 February 2026). In it, they describe how climate, nature and social priorities are interconnected and transition planning that brings these all together can better address business risk, and foster value creation and long-term resilience.

Human Level’s Take

• The report makes a clear case: “We don’t do climate on Monday, nature on Tuesday, and just transition on Wednesday.” Climate, nature and social priorities can no longer be managed separately by companies, especially as physical climate risks accelerate, nature dependencies and impacts deepen, and stakeholder expectations rise.
• Businesses can develop transition plans that integrate mitigation, adaptation, resilience and just transition into one coherent strategy. For many companies, so far, transition planning has focused on climate mitigation, but embedding adaptation, resilience and just transition into transition strategies can protect operations and assets and make these plans future-proof.
• Furthermore, the report argues that this integration delivers efficiency, opportunity maximisation, resilience and stakeholder confidence, especially in a world where climate disasters already caused US$327 billion in losses in 2024 alone, over half uninsured; more than half of global GDP depends moderately or highly on nature; and unmanaged climate risks could threaten 5–25% of EBITDA by 2050.
• Integrated planning isn’t about making sustainability more complicated but about making it more worthwhile, defensible and resilient. And if you’re still running three separate strategies, you risk duplicating efforts, increasing costs and missing business opportunities. Holistic strategies identify compounded risks but also shared solutions.
• The report lists examples for how companies are integrating social, environmental and climate outcomes in their business and sustainability strategies, like Lloyds Bank Group, PepsiCo and Diageo. While different, the examples illustrate a general point: integrated transition planning is a strategic redefinition of how businesses plan, invest and operate in a world defined by interconnected risks and opportunities.

Key takeaways:

• What is integrated transition planning? WBCSD and ERM introduce the concept of integrated transition planning, which they define as the evolution of traditional climate transition plans into a comprehensive, cross-functional strategy that combines mitigation, adaptation and resilience – covering climate, nature and social priorities. Rather than treating these as parallel areas of work, integrated transition planning seeks to embed physical climate risk, nature dependencies and social licence directly into a core business strategy that identifies compounded risks and opportunities, for stronger long-term resilience. This holistic approach is particularly important given that 85% of the world’s largest companies have significant nature dependencies — meaning their revenues and operations rely on ecosystem services such as water, raw materials, soil stability and climate regulation; and that and unmanaged climate risks could threaten 5–25% of EBITDA by 2050. Integrated transition planning aligns capital allocation, risk management and operational strategy so that climate ambition, nature stewardship and social inclusion reinforce, rather than undermine, one another.
• Why use integrated just transition planning? The business case for integrating climate, environmental and social priorities and strategies is accelerating. In 2024 alone, climate-related disasters caused about US$327 billion in losses, more than half of which was uninsured. Additionally, even on a net-zero trajectory, risks like rising temperatures and sea-level rise could reduce global GDP by up to 8.5%. Meanwhile, over half of global GDP (around US$58 trillion) is moderately or highly dependent on nature, with 85% of the world’s largest companies having significant nature dependencies. And, when it comes to people and workers, climate-driven health impacts could reduce global productivity by at least US$1.5 trillion by 2050. Diverging national policies, democratic downturns, and rapid technological change are intensifying and increasing these potential negative impacts. For companies to assess and manage these risks, integrated planning can be more effective as it allows them to identify trade-offs and co-benefits, take advantage of new opportunities for capital allocation, reduce duplication of efforts, increase business resilience and give investors, lenders and management greater confidence in future business prospects. In line with this approach, reporting frameworks, such as the EU’s CSRD or the IFRS, already require companies to disclose impacts risks, opportunities and trade-offs across climate, nature and social dimensions.
• How integration works in practice. In practice, integration starts by understanding climate mitigation, physical risks and adaptation, nature impacts and dependencies, and social outcomes – each with their distinct data, targets and strategic actions. Then, companies can identify interconnections and inter-dependencies, so that they can shift from managing these separately into uniting them in one coordinated strategic framework, as “we don’t do climate on Monday, nature on Tuesday, and just transition on Wednesday.” The first step to doing so is mapping the intersections, where material climate, nature and social risks and opportunities overlap. Then, companies can plan for and prioritise actions that target multiple outcomes and align decision rules, KPIs and governance across functions to achieve these. This can be done by, for example, bringing finance, sustainability, risk management, HR and operations into the same room to facilitate integrated decision-making. The report shares examples of how companies are doing this successfully. For instance, Lloyds Banking Group is using a systems-based approach to invest or lend across sectors that integrates social, environmental and climate components; PepsiCo is scaling regenerative agriculture to cut emissions while restoring soils and supporting farming communities; and Diageo is integrating local sourcing, water stewardship and smallholder support to strengthen both climate resilience and community outcomes in sourcing countries.