'Green hush' risks just transition momentum when it's needed most

Corporate climate talk has been drying up. The spread of "green hush" – companies saying less about their climate transition plans – looks like retreat. Yet it may also mark a welcome recalibration; a shift away from unrealistic pledges and towards the quieter, harder job of turning words into action.

The drivers vary across geographies and sectors. In the US, political attacks on ESG are pushing responsible business underground. In Europe, lawsuits and activist scrutiny fuel fears of being accused of greenwashing if targets aren't met as promised. Across markets, multinationals face pressure to dial down climate rhetoric even as their portfolios continue to decarbonise.

Behind closed doors, however, many executives insist they're doing more than ever. Less noise, more substance – perhaps. That paradox could end up defining corporate climate communication in the year ahead. 

What does silence mean?

We recently convened a roundtable with senior practitioners across sectors – from heavy industry to consumer goods – and the picture that emerged was nuanced. Even as external communications shrink, real work on decarbonisation and just transitions continues – in some cases accelerating. Silence may not mean inaction, executives emphasised.

The roundtable made clear how much language matters now. Companies are swapping terms – talking about "resilience" and "future skills" rather than "climate" or "ESG”.  For some, this is a survival tactic; for others, a way to connect more concretely with on-the-ground operations and the communities actually driving the work.

A recalibration worth welcoming – with caveats

For two decades, corporate sustainability has often been driven by ambitious targets. The hope was that bold promises would spark innovation and accelerate progress, even if the exact path was unclear at first. This ambition-first culture generated momentum, but also bred cynicism, with targets missed or quietly dropped – and accusations of greenwashing running amok.

For practitioners who have long pushed for substance over slogans, the current recalibration brings a potential silver lining. Majoring on implementation rather than marketing is healthy. It signals a maturing of corporate sustainability, with companies shifting resources toward what can be credibly delivered.
Yet it also comes with risk. Silence, if left unchecked, can shade into apathy. A communications vacuum can give cover to backsliding or delay. Investors, in need of transparent progress updates, may lose clarity on where to allocate leverage and capital. Corporate motivation for a just transition has never been more urgent and going too quiet could sap momentum when it’s needed most.

What just transition actually means – and why it matters

“Just transition” isn't jargon. It's about recognising that the shift to a sustainable economy will create winners and losers, and that how we manage that change determines whether communities thrive or are left behind.

This means anticipating job losses in carbon-intensive industries and creating pathways to new opportunities, so workers aren’t casualties of decarbonisation. It means engaging communities in design and decision making – rather than imposing change from above. Crucially, it means recognising that climate action and human rights are inseparable.

For business, this isn't philanthropy or CSR but strategic necessity. Companies that don’t manage the social dimensions of their transition risk strikes, legal challenges, reputation harm and ultimately failure to deliver on their climate commitments on time or at all.

From salt pans to coal towns: what real transition looks like

The difference between rhetoric and reality becomes vivid when you look at examples of just transition in practice. In the salt flats of Gujarat, India, thousands of women salt farmers have swapped diesel pumps for solar power through a programme led by the Self-Employed Women's Association (SEWA).

These informal workers, who produce much of India's salt under gruelling conditions, were trapped in debt cycles – spending much of their earnings on diesel while earning a pittance for their labour.

SEWA's model went beyond clean energy. It addressed gender inequity and exploitative trading relationships that kept these women marginalised. The women have trained as solar technicians, formed cooperatives to negotiate better prices for their salt, and now sell electricity back to the grid. The results: average income up 600%, emissions down 19,000 tonnes a year, and a model that could be replicated across informal economies worldwide.

This is a story about patient, community-led work, in collaboration with business, that addresses economic inequality and climate action simultaneously. It's a reminder that the world's transition to net zero cannot succeed without bringing along the two billion people in the informal economy who are too often invisible in corporate transition plans.

Halfway around the world, the coal town of Collie in Western Australia offers another instructive model. With 1,800 residents working in an industry facing extinction, Collie could have become another cautionary tale, but it hasn’t.

A Just Transition Working Group brought employers, unions, government and community members to the same table. The result has delivered AU$662 million in investment for retraining, new green industries like battery storage and green steel, plus pay rises and enhanced redundancy packages that built trust.

As one union organiser put it: "Just transition should change people's lives right now, not sometime in the future.”

Business cannot afford to stay silent

When businesses stop articulating why sustainable transition matters, they risk ceding the narrative to those who would halt progress.

Silence also undermines collective learning. The innovation required for successful transition – technical, financial and social – depends on companies knowing and showing what works and what doesn't. When everyone goes quiet, progress slows.

Silence also shifts responsibility onto others. When business withdraws from the conversation, pressure falls on NGOs and communities already stretched thin.

The examples from Gujarat and Collie show what's possible when stakeholders stay engaged, transparent and committed to co-creating change. They succeed because they have harnessed technological disruption to deliver broader social transformation.

Businesses should take heart from these examples. The transition to sustainable economic models is one of the defining challenges of our time. It requires companies to be bold and transparent, recognising that obligations extend beyond shareholders to workers, communities, and future generations. By taking this approach, businesses can also become more resilient for the future.

Silence, ultimately, isn't golden. It's a missed opportunity. In 2026, the question isn't whether businesses will continue their transition work – many clearly will. The question is whether they'll stay in the conversation, even when it's uncomfortable. That's a real test of commitment, and one the world is watching closely. In the end, silence is one luxury a just transition cannot afford.

This article was first published in BusinessGreen on 4th November 2025.