Reports are getting longer, but not necessarily easier to absorb. In its 2024 review of 250 sustainability reports from S&P 500 companies, Teneo found that the average report had reached 83 pages, with the shortest at 15 pages and the longest at 211 pages. At the same time, only 49% of companies issued a press release to accompany the report, and only 14% provided an executive summary. In other words, many companies are producing more disclosure while doing less to help people engage with it. 

That matters because research suggests the form of sustainability communication affects whether it is useful. A 2023 study in Finance Research Letters found that more readable sustainability reports provide more value-relevant information to the financial market. The implication is simple: disclosure does not create maximum value by existing alone; it has to be understandable. 

Other research points in the same direction. A 2025 study on voluntary ESG disclosure found that ESG reports reduce disagreement among ESG investors, and that this effect is stronger when reports are more accessible and more credible. Readability, presentation and verifiability are not cosmetic extras. They shape whether the information actually helps investors reach clearer judgments. 

Older research on integrated reporting also warned that many such reports are simply too difficult to read, limiting their usefulness to only part of their intended audience. 

So the problem is not lack of ESG information. It is the growing gap between disclosure and engagement. If companies publish long sustainability reports without summaries, launch communication or clear storytelling, they should not be surprised when stakeholders fail to read, remember or act on what is in them. Evidence suggests that better communication is not a decorative add-on to ESG reporting. It is part of what makes the reporting matter.