Sustainability is no longer a side topic. It is firmly embedded in corporate strategy, investor communication, and regulatory agendas.
But treasury operates in a different reality.
Where others can afford ambition, treasury is accountable for liquidity, risk, and capital preservation. That difference matters. Because while sustainability is widely supported in principle, its adoption in treasury is still cautious, selective, and in many cases, limited.
Recent survey data from TreasurySpring in collaboration with the Association of Corporate Treasurers and London Stock Exchange highlights exactly where we stand today. And more importantly, why.
Read the full report here: Sustainability Impact Report
The intention is there. The action is lagging.
There is no shortage of awareness. Sustainability is clearly on the radar of treasury teams, and in many organisations it is already embedded at a broader corporate level.
Yet when it comes to actual allocation decisions, the picture is more reserved.
A significant share of treasurers are not currently investing in sustainability-focused products, with 42% indicating they have no plans to do so, and more than half indicating they do not yet have a dedicated sustainable cash investment strategy in place.
At the same time, only a minority expect to increase their allocation in the near term.
This is not a lack of interest. It is a reflection of how treasury works. Decisions are not driven by narrative, but by clarity, risk, and accountability.
As Ricardo Shuh notes, this reflects the reality treasury teams face today: sustainability is important at a corporate level, but treasury operates under a different mandate. Liquidity management, risk control, and capital preservation remain the priority, naturally leading to a more cautious and selective approach.
Treasury adoption is practical, not ideological
One of the more telling insights from the survey is where the real friction sits.
The biggest hurdles are not philosophical objections. They are operational:
- Limited know-how
- Concerns around greenwashing
- Restrictive investment policies
- A lack of standardisation and transparency
In fact, lack of know-how alone is cited by 25% of respondents, making it the single largest barrier to adoption.
In other words, treasury is not pushing back against sustainability. It is pushing back against uncertainty.
That distinction is critical.
Ricardo Shuh highlights that the gap between intention and execution is largely driven by a lack of clarity and trust. Without consistent classifications and reliable benchmarks, it becomes difficult to assess ESG products with the same confidence as traditional instruments.
Because treasury decisions are rarely narrative-driven. They require transparency, comparability, and well-defined risk-return profiles.
Sustainability has not yet reached the core of treasury
Even today, sustainability considerations are not consistently embedded across treasury activities.
Cash investing is the most visible entry point, yet nearly one-third of respondents indicate sustainability has no impact at all on treasury activities.
This highlights a broader challenge.
Sustainability is often driven top-down, while treasury operates bottom-up. Policies and ambitions may exist at board level, but treasury will only integrate them once they are measurable, comparable, and aligned with existing frameworks.
Until then, sustainability remains adjacent rather than central.
What treasurers actually need
If there is one clear takeaway from the data, it is this: treasury is not asking for more ambition. It is asking for more clarity.
The strongest drivers for increased adoption are:
- Clear and consistent classifications of sustainable investments
- Greater availability of suitable products
- Standardisation across the market
Interestingly, advanced impact tracking and reporting tools rank lower.
That is not because treasurers do not care about impact. It is because they first need to trust what they are investing in.
Without a solid foundation, optimisation comes later.
A fragmented external environment
Global developments are not (yet) creating a uniform push.
While some organisations report increased internal support for sustainability, others see no change, and a notable portion experiences growing uncertainty.
This reflects a broader reality. Regulation is evolving, definitions are still shifting, and geopolitical factors continue to influence priorities.
For treasury, that translates into caution rather than acceleration.
As Eleanor Hill points out, ESG in treasury is maturing, but not in a straight line. The market has moved away from indiscriminately labelling everything as “sustainable”, which is a healthy correction. At the same time, some of the supporting ecosystem, such as dedicated ESG conferences and knowledge-sharing platforms, appears to be scaling back.
That creates a tension. If lack of know-how remains a key barrier, reducing the forums that build that knowledge risks slowing progress further.
Technology will likely be the tipping point
Looking forward, the expected drivers of change are not surprising.
AI, advanced analytics, digital ESG reporting tools, and increasing regulation are all seen as key enablers for the next phase of sustainable treasury.
This suggests that adoption will not be driven by policy alone, but by infrastructure.
Once sustainability becomes easier to measure, integrate, and monitor within existing treasury systems, it moves from theory to execution.
From ambition to implementation
There is also a level of realism in how organisations approach sustainability targets.
A majority indicate that communicating progress is currently more important than committing to ambitious targets.
That may sound cautious, but it reflects where the market is today.
Treasury is not designed for leaps of faith. It is designed for controlled progression.
Eleanor Hill captures this well: if ESG is to move from treasury-adjacent to fully embedded, it needs to become something treasurers can use in the same way as credit ratings, liquidity metrics, or counterparty limits, consistent, comparable, and part of daily decision-making.
Final thought
Sustainable investing in treasury is not stalled. It is maturing.
- The awareness is there
- The intent is there
- The execution framework is still developing
And that is exactly why this moment matters.
As Ricardo Shuh notes, the current cautious approach is not hesitation, but discipline. And as Eleanor Hill emphasises, moving forward will require continued investment in education, honest reflection on what works, and a collective industry effort.
Because once sustainability meets treasury on its own terms, adoption will not need to be pushed.
It will happen naturally.
Also Read
- Building resilience through treasury policies
- Treasurers or Traders?
- Understanding collateral: A guide to secured FTFs
- TreasurySpring Announces Launch of a Public API and Partnership with Kyriba
Join our Treasury Community
Treasury Masterminds is a community of professionals working in Treasury Management, as well as those interested in learning more about related topics, including Cash Management, Foreign Exchange Management, and Payments. To register and connect with Treasury professionals, click [HERE] or fill out the form below to get more information.