Nike’s sustainability program runs under the Purpose 2025 targets framework, a 29-target structure spanning People, Planet, and Play pillars, with the most recent disclosure being the FY24 Sustainability Data PDF published July 2025. The framework took the place of a full Impact Report cycle, with FY23 being the last published full Impact Report (March 2024). Nike’s headline climate commitments are SBTi-validated targets to reduce Scopes 1 and 2 emissions by 65% and Scope 3 by 30% by FY30, both from an FY15 baseline, on a stated 2050 net-zero ambition through the Move to Zero initiative. The FY24 report covers the fiscal year from June 1, 2023 to May 31, 2024, and is the second-to-last reporting period before the FY25 target year closes. The CR Sustainability and Governance Committee of the Board oversees the program, with PwC providing limited assurance on energy and Scopes 1 and 2 emissions, a subset of Scope 3 (commercial air travel), and cumulative water restoration funding. Notably, Nike dropped emissions from “Use of Sold Products” from its FY24 disclosure on grounds that no standardized methodology exists for footwear and accessories, a material change from prior years that reduces the headline Scope 3 figure.

• NIKE, Inc. revenue FY24: approximately $51.4 billion (Nike Annual Report).
• Total FY24 GHG footprint (Scopes 1, 2, and 3): 8,266,474 mtCO2e, of which Scope 3 represented 99.16% (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Scope 1 + 2 emissions reduced 74% vs. FY15 baseline by FY24, exceeding the 65% by FY30 SBTi target (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Renewable electricity in owned or operated facilities reached 96% in FY24, against a 100% RE100 commitment for FY25 (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• 67 supplier non-compliances flagged in Tier 1 chemical management as a percentage of audit findings (14.8%) and 15.6% in Tier 2 working hours, indicating the worst supplier compliance categories (FY24 Sustainability Data).

Source

Sources: https://media.about.nike.com/files/c6cc3831-dc4e-4485-8e31-f60de30b890d/FY24_NIKE,Inc._Sustainability_Data.pdf https://about.nike.com/en/resources/sustainability-data

Sustainability Strategy and Goals

Nike’s Purpose 2025 targets framework maps to UN SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), SDG 5 (Gender Equality), and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and is built around three pillars: People, Planet, and Play. The Planet pillar contains nine targets across Carbon, Waste, Water, and Chemistry. The Responsible Supply Chain pillar contains three targets on health and safety, gender equity, and worker engagement, plus the foundational Code of Conduct compliance metric. All climate targets are SBTi-validated against a 2015 baseline, and Nike is a signatory to RE100 (100% renewable electricity in owned or operated facilities).

Net Zero and Carbon Emissions

Nike’s SBTi-validated 2030 targets are a 65% absolute reduction in Scopes 1 and 2 from an FY15 baseline and a 30% absolute reduction in Scope 3 on the same baseline, on a stated 2050 net-zero ambition. The FY24 result was a 74% Scopes 1+2 reduction (already exceeding the 2030 target by nine percentage points) and an 11% Scope 3 reduction (well behind pace for 30%). The Scope 1+2 outperformance is driven primarily by renewable electricity buildout, with market-based Scope 2 emissions falling from 160,840 mtCO2e in FY20 to 12,120 mtCO2e in FY24, a 92% reduction. Total renewable electricity reached 555,717 MWh in FY24, 96% of owned-or-operated electricity consumption, sourced from a mix of virtual PPAs in the US and EU, unbundled Energy Attribute Certificates, onsite solar (16,749 MWh), onsite wind (26,095 MWh), and a direct line PPA for wind (8,343 MWh in Belgium). Nike notes its FY15 baseline for renewable electricity was 14%, making the FY24 result a 82-percentage-point swing.

Water Stewardship

Nike’s water targets cover both manufacturing freshwater use intensity and water restoration in the extended cotton supply chain. Freshwater use per kilogram of textile dyeing and finishing fell from 84.4 L/kg in FY20 to 71.4 L/kg in FY24, a 15% reduction against a 25% target, indicating a moderate pace miss. Cumulative water restored through projects in Australia, India, Pakistan, Brazil, and the United States reached 6.9 billion liters by FY24, against a 13 billion liter target by FY25 — Nike will need to roughly double restored volume in one year to hit target. Cumulative funding for water restoration projects since 2019 program inception reached $2,025,000 as of May 31, 2024.

Deforestation and Biodiversity

Nike engages deforestation and biodiversity primarily through material sourcing rather than a stand-alone program. All leather sourced is Leather Working Group certified. Lower-Carbon Impact Leather, defined by third-party-peer-reviewed lifecycle assessments meeting Nike’s emission-intensity criteria, reached 40% of total leather use in FY24 (28,267 metric tons of a 70,832 metric ton total). Synthetic leather and Flyleather (Nike’s non-leather substitute) together accounted for 31% of leather material use. Cotton sourcing includes 13% organic, 1.2% recycled, and 52% third-party certified in FY24, with the residual being conventional. Nike has not published a formal deforestation policy comparable to those at food and beverage peers, a notable gap given the materials exposure.

Packaging and Circular Economy

Waste reduction per unit in manufacturing, distribution centers, and headquarters reached 260.1 g/unit in FY24, a 11% reduction against a 10% target — target met. Waste diversion from landfill and incineration reached 98% in FY24, holding flat against a 100% goal. Recycled waste percentage stood at 75% against an 80% target. Finished Product Waste collected and recycled or donated reached 6.9 million units in FY24, down sharply from 17.9 million in FY23 (the FY23 surge was reportedly driven by one-time inventory clearances) and well short of the 10x baseline target (which translates to 13 million units against the FY20 baseline of 1.3 million). The Move to Zero brand initiative encompasses Refurbished, recycled, and donated product programs alongside the broader manufacturing waste agenda.

Human Rights and Responsible Sourcing

The Code of Conduct’s Foundational Expectations compliance rate fell from 94% in FY20 to 87% in FY24, a meaningful slip, against a 100% target. Tier 2 (material supplier) compliance rose from 38% in FY23 to 76% in FY24 as the scope expanded, but distribution center compliance reached only 60% and Air Manufacturing Innovation reached 100% in FY24. The most common audit non-compliances in Tier 1 were chemical management (14.8% of total findings), occupational health and hygiene (14.4%), and workplace safety (12.8%). In Tier 2, working hours non-compliance was the largest category at 15.6% of findings, followed by workplace safety at 15.2%. In distribution centers, working hours non-compliance reached a stark 48.5% of findings. Five suppliers were rated Zero Tolerance in FY24, with 69 in the Red category (down from 144 in FY23). Strategic supplier health and safety maturity reached 96% Level 3 against a 100% target.

Community and Social Impact

Nike’s community investment is concentrated in youth sport programming, gender equity in the supply chain, and the Black Community Commitment. In FY24, 67% of strategic suppliers achieved mature gender-equitable capability against a 100% target by FY25, up from 23% in FY23 — a substantial acceleration but still well behind target. Worker engagement measurement reached 75% of strategic suppliers in FY24 against a 100% target. Nike does not disclose detailed community investment dollar figures in the FY24 Sustainability Data PDF, with that information typically reserved for the broader Impact Report cycle.

Governance and Transparency

The Board’s Corporate Responsibility, Sustainability and Governance Committee oversees the program. Global Audit and Risk Management reports to the CFO and is overseen by the Audit and Finance Committee. PwC provides limited assurance over selected metrics including energy consumption and renewable electricity use, Scopes 1 and 2 GHG emissions, a subset of Scope 3 emissions (commercial air travel), and cumulative water restoration funding under AICPA attestation standards. Reporting references the GHG Protocol, the Global Reporting Initiative, and the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board indexes. Nike has historically not been a CSRD-mandated reporter (as a US-headquartered company), and the company explicitly notes in its safe harbor that terms like “net zero” and “ESG” should not be read as carrying their U.S. federal securities law meanings.

Technology and Innovation

Nike’s Air Manufacturing Innovation facilities produce Air bag units, React and ReactX foam using 100% renewable electricity in FY24 (market-based Scope 2 emissions of zero). Onsite solar across the global portfolio reached 16,749 MWh in FY24, with onsite wind at 26,095 MWh and a direct line PPA for wind contributing 8,343 MWh at the European Logistics Campus in Belgium. The Indonesia Renewable Energy Certificate program, launched in mid-FY22 across Tier 1 and Tier 2 suppliers, drove a meaningful share of the Scope 3 renewable electricity uplift (888,376 MWh of renewable electricity consumed by Tier 1 and Tier 2 in FY24 versus 13,402 MWh in FY20). Sustainable Aviation Fuel and biofuel are used in corporate jets and inbound transportation (3,305 MWh of SAF in FY24, 25,906 mtCO2e of biofuel-purchased reductions in inbound transportation), though Nike reports these as informational only because the GHG Protocol does not currently allow them to count against Scope 1 or 3 inventories.

Global Partnerships and Advocacy

Nike is a signatory to RE100 (renewable electricity), participates in the UN Fashion Industry Charter for Climate Action, and is a member of the Sustainable Apparel Coalition and the Apparel Impact Institute. The company collaborates with the Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals foundation on chemical management standards. Audit and verification partnerships include the Social Labor Convergence Program (592 FY24 audits), the Cascale Higg FEM (541 audits), and ZDHC Wastewater Guidelines (287 audits) as the three largest verification frameworks across the supply base.

• Scope 1+2 emissions FY24 reduction vs. FY15 baseline: 74%, exceeding the 65% by FY30 SBTi target (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Scope 3 emissions FY24 reduction vs. FY15 baseline: 11%, against a 30% by FY30 SBTi target (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Environmentally Preferred Materials use in FY24: 48% against a 50% by FY25 target (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Tier 1 and Tier 2 supplier renewable electricity consumption FY24: 888,376 MWh, up from 13,402 MWh in FY20 (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Water restored cumulatively through FY24: 6.9 billion liters against a 13 billion liter FY25 target (FY24 Sustainability Data).

Source

Sources: https://media.about.nike.com/files/c6cc3831-dc4e-4485-8e31-f60de30b890d/FY24_NIKE,Inc._Sustainability_Data.pdf https://about.nike.com/en/resources/emissions-footprint

Key Sustainability Innovations and Technologies

Nike’s most material innovation lever is materials substitution. Recycled polyester reached 63% of total polyester use in FY24 (115,588 metric tons of 183,619 total), up from 23% in FY20, the single largest carbon reduction lever in the Scope 3 footprint by tonnage. Recycled rubber reached 3% of total rubber use (3,638 metric tons), and recycled EVA foam recovered to 0.9% after methodological disruptions in FY22. Lower-Carbon Impact Leather, third-party-verified via peer-reviewed LCAs, reached 40% of total leather use (28,267 of 70,832 metric tons). The cumulative result is materials-related GHG emissions reductions of 1.1 million metric tons in FY24 against an FY25 target of 0.5 million, double the target.

Manufacturing and transportation emissions fell 36% versus an FY20 baseline against a 0% (hold flat) target, reaching 2.3 million mtCO2e in FY24 from 3.7 million in FY20. Renewable energy consumption across Tier 1 manufacturing and Tier 2 textile dyeing and finishing facilities reached 1.75 million MWh in FY24, with renewable electricity at 27% of total (888,376 MWh). The Indonesia REC program at Tier 1 and Tier 2 is the largest single intervention, with Indonesia accounting for 248 MWh of unbundled EACs plus 329 MWh of Green Power Purchase (Retail Supply). Belgium’s European Logistics Campus is the most decarbonized single Nike facility, with 6,558 MWh of onsite solar, 15,245 MWh of onsite wind, and 8,343 MWh of direct line PPA wind in FY24 — effectively self-sufficient on clean electricity.

Logistics emissions (inbound and outbound transportation) reached 512,765 mtCO2e in FY24, down from 1.18 million mtCO2e in FY20 — a 57% reduction reflecting the partial transition from air to ocean freight as production volumes normalized post-COVID. Nike purchased 25,906 mtCO2e of biofuel reductions in inbound transportation in FY24, reported informationally per current GHG Protocol guidance.

• Recycled polyester: 63% of total polyester use in FY24, up from 23% in FY20 (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Materials GHG emissions reduced via Environmentally Preferred Materials in FY24: 1.1 million mtCO2e, double the 0.5 million FY25 target (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Manufacturing and transportation emissions: 2.3 million mtCO2e in FY24, down 36% vs. FY20 baseline of 3.7 million against a 0% target (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Lower-Carbon Impact Leather: 40% of total leather use in FY24, up from 36% in FY23 (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Belgium European Logistics Campus FY24 renewable energy: 6,558 MWh onsite solar plus 15,245 MWh onsite wind plus 8,343 MWh direct line PPA wind (FY24 Sustainability Data).

Source

Sources: https://media.about.nike.com/files/c6cc3831-dc4e-4485-8e31-f60de30b890d/FY24_NIKE,Inc._Sustainability_Data.pdf

Measurable Impacts

The trajectory from FY20 to FY24 is uneven across the target framework. On the climate side, Scope 1+2 emissions in owned or operated facilities fell from 226,000 mtCO2e in FY20 to 69,500 mtCO2e in FY24, a 69% reduction against a 70% by FY25 target — effectively achieved with one year remaining. Renewable electricity in owned or operated facilities rose from 48% in FY20 to 96% in FY24 against the 100% by FY25 target. Manufacturing and transportation emissions fell 36% versus the FY20 baseline against a 0% target, materially outperforming.

Total Scope 3 emissions fell from approximately 11.6 million mtCO2e in FY20 to 8.2 million mtCO2e in FY24, a 29% reduction. Part of this is attributable to lower production volumes as Nike’s revenue declined in FY24, and part to the methodology change excluding Use of Sold Products. Against the FY15 SBTi baseline of approximately 9.2 million mtCO2e, the FY24 result represents an 11% reduction, well behind the 30% by FY30 target trajectory. Tier 1 Footwear emissions fell from 1.42 million mtCO2e in FY20 to 1.09 million in FY24 (23% reduction), while Tier 2 Apparel Textile Dyeing and Finishing fell from 1.01 million to 760,000 (25% reduction). Logistics emissions fell from 1.30 million mtCO2e in FY20 to 553,000 in FY24, a 58% reduction reflecting freight mode shift.

• Owned or operated facility GHG emissions: 226,000 mtCO2e (FY20) → 87,600 (FY22) → 70,700 (FY23) → 69,500 (FY24), a 69% reduction (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Renewable electricity in own operations: 48% (FY20) → 78% (FY21) → 92% (FY22) → 96% (FY23) → 96% (FY24) (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Manufacturing and transportation Scope 3 emissions: 3.7 million mtCO2e (FY20) → 2.3 million (FY24), 36% reduction (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Total Scope 3 emissions: ~11.6 million mtCO2e (FY20) → 8.2 million (FY24) (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Logistics emissions (inbound + outbound transportation): 1.30 million mtCO2e (FY20) → 553,000 (FY24), 58% reduction (FY24 Sustainability Data).

Source

Sources: https://media.about.nike.com/files/c6cc3831-dc4e-4485-8e31-f60de30b890d/FY24_NIKE,Inc._Sustainability_Data.pdf

Challenges and Areas for Improvement

Scope 3 emissions remain the structural challenge. The 11% reduction against an FY15 baseline by FY24 leaves Nike well behind the 30% by FY30 trajectory, particularly given that part of the FY24 reduction is attributable to lower production volumes rather than to operating improvements. Nike noted it will resubmit its science-based target, suggesting a recalibration of methodology and possibly baseline. The exclusion of Use of Sold Products from Scope 3 disclosure starting in FY24, while consistent with GHG Protocol allowances for footwear and apparel, narrows the comparative envelope versus prior years and removes a metric that, while methodologically uncertain, had been reported for context.

Supplier compliance is the other visible weakness. The Code of Conduct Foundational Expectations rate fell from 94% in FY20 to 87% in FY24, a seven-point slip in the wrong direction against a 100% target. The Zero Tolerance and Red supplier categories (combined 74 factories in FY24) are down from a peak of 224 in FY22 but remain materially above FY20 levels (16 Red, 0 Zero Tolerance). Audit non-compliance in Tier 1 chemical management (14.8% of findings), occupational health and hygiene (14.4%), and workplace safety (12.8%) reflect persistent challenges in supplier operating conditions. The 48.5% working hours non-compliance rate in distribution centers is particularly stark and likely reflects scope expansion to facilities not previously included rather than a sudden deterioration.

On the Planet side, three FY25 targets are now unlikely to hit on the published trajectory: renewable electricity at 96% versus 100%, Environmentally Preferred Materials at 48% versus 50%, and clean chemistry alternatives for the 10 priority chemistries (6 of 10 alternatives identified by FY24). The water restoration target of 13 billion liters by FY25 sits at 6.9 billion through FY24, requiring near-doubling in one year. The 10x finished product waste recycled or donated target was effectively met in FY23 (5.4x against baseline) but slipped in FY24 to 6.9 million units from 17.9 million in FY23 — a significant reversal that the company attributes to the FY23 figure being inflated by one-time inventory programs.

Nike has not publicly issued a Post-2025 target framework as of mid-2025, leaving a strategic disclosure gap for what comes after the Purpose 2025 cycle closes.

• Scope 3 emissions reduction in FY24 vs. FY15 baseline: 11%, well behind the 30% by FY30 target (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Code of Conduct Foundational Expectations compliance: 94% (FY20) → 87% (FY24), against a 100% target (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Five priority chemistries still without clean alternatives identified in FY24, against a 10 by FY25 target (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Water restored cumulatively: 6.9 billion liters at FY24 against a 13 billion liter FY25 target, requiring near-doubling in one year (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Finished Product Waste recycled or donated: 6.9 million units in FY24, down from 17.9 million in FY23 (FY24 Sustainability Data).

Source

Sources: https://media.about.nike.com/files/c6cc3831-dc4e-4485-8e31-f60de30b890d/FY24_NIKE,Inc._Sustainability_Data.pdf

Future Plans and Long-Term Goals

Through FY30, the program centers on the SBTi-validated 65% Scope 1+2 reduction (already exceeded in FY24) and the 30% Scope 3 reduction (well behind pace). Nike has stated a 2050 net-zero ambition under the Move to Zero initiative but has not yet published interim 2035 or 2040 milestones. The company has flagged a forthcoming “restated science-based target” and a 2030 enterprise-level Scope 3 emissions target, suggesting both methodology and ambition are being reworked. The FY25 target year is the close of the current Purpose 2025 cycle, and Nike has not publicly disclosed its post-2025 framework as of mid-2025, leaving 2026 and beyond strategically uncertain.

In the near term, the Q4 FY25 closing measurement will determine final outcomes for the Responsible Supply Chain targets (Foundational Expectations, gender equity, worker engagement), and FY25 full-year results will close out the Planet targets. The water restoration target of 13 billion liters by FY25 will require either a step-change in project velocity (current run rate is approximately 1.7 billion liters per year incremental) or recognition of a partial achievement. The Indonesia REC program at Tier 1 and Tier 2 is expected to extend, and direct-line wind PPA expansion (Belgium model) may be replicated in other geographies.

Relative to peers, Nike leads on operational decarbonization (74% Scope 1+2 reduction vs FY15 is the deepest in the athletic sector) and on Materials emissions reduction (1.1 million mtCO2e versus 0.5 million FY25 target). It lags Adidas on Tier 1 and Tier 2 supplier coal phase-out depth, and lags Puma on the ratio of Scope 3 absolute reduction targets (Puma has committed to a 33% Scope 3 absolute reduction by 2030 from a 2017 baseline; Nike’s 30% Scope 3 by FY30 sits in the same ballpark but Nike has missed pace by a wider margin in execution).

• 2030 Scope 1 + 2 SBTi target: 65% absolute reduction vs. FY15 baseline (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• 2030 Scope 3 SBTi target: 30% absolute reduction vs. FY15 baseline (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• 2050 net-zero ambition: stated under Move to Zero initiative, no interim 2035/2040 milestones published (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Restated SBTi target and 2030 enterprise-level Scope 3 emissions target flagged but not yet published (FY24 Sustainability Data).
• Post-FY25 target framework: not yet publicly issued as of mid-2025 disclosures (FY24 Sustainability Data).

Source

Sources: https://media.about.nike.com/files/c6cc3831-dc4e-4485-8e31-f60de30b890d/FY24_NIKE,Inc._Sustainability_Data.pdf

Comparisons to Industry Competitors

Adidas is the closest scale and product peer, with €23.7 billion in 2024 revenue (versus Nike’s roughly $51.4 billion FY24, so Adidas is about half Nike’s size). Adidas targets a 70% Scope 1+2 reduction and a 43% Scope 3 reduction by 2030, both SBTi-validated against a 2022 baseline (a later baseline than Nike’s FY15, which makes Adidas’s target marginally more ambitious year-on-year). In 2024, Adidas reported a 17% Scope 1+2 reduction and a 20% Scope 3 reduction versus 2023, with total Scope 1+2+3 emissions of approximately 6.1 million mtCO2e in 2023. Notably, Adidas is voluntarily reporting under CSRD and ESRS frameworks (as an EU-headquartered company subject to mandatory CSRD from FY25 onwards), giving its disclosure narrower assurance gaps than Nike’s GRI and SASB framing. Recycled polyester use reached 99% across feasible product applications at Adidas in 2024, edging Nike’s 63%. Head-to-head: Adidas leads on recycled materials penetration and on regulatory disclosure depth via CSRD; Nike leads on absolute Scope 1+2 reduction depth (74% vs FY15 versus Adidas’s 17% in one year) and on supply chain audit volume.

Puma, the third-largest athletic peer at €8.6 billion in 2024 revenue (roughly one-sixth Nike’s scale), has the most aggressive climate targets in the sector. Its SBTi-validated 2030 targets are a 90% absolute Scope 1+2 reduction (versus Nike’s 65%) and a 33% absolute Scope 3 reduction from a 2017 baseline (Nike’s is 30% from FY15). Puma achieved 100% renewable electricity at own sites in 2024, reaching a milestone Nike missed by four percentage points. In 2024, Puma’s Scope 3 emissions from purchased goods and services and upstream transportation fell 10.2% versus 2017 against the 33% by 2030 target — broadly comparable in pace to Nike’s 11% Scope 3 reduction. Puma’s total 2024 Scope 1+2+3 emissions reached approximately 1.58 million mtCO2e, with Scope 3 representing approximately 99.6% of the total. Head-to-head: Puma leads on Scope 1+2 target ambition and on 100% renewable electricity achievement; Nike leads on absolute scale of decarbonization investment and on supplier engagement depth.

A note on disclosure: Adidas was the subject of a German court greenwashing ruling in early 2025 regarding climate neutrality claims, a regulatory development worth flagging because it sets a precedent for how athletic apparel sustainability marketing will be policed in the EU. Nike’s safe harbor language explicitly disclaims that terms like “net zero” carry their U.S. federal securities law meaning, an approach that sidesteps but does not resolve the same underlying risk in U.S. and EU jurisdictions.

• Adidas 2030 Scope 1+2 SBTi target: 70% absolute reduction vs. 2022 baseline; Scope 3 target: 43% (Adidas 2024 Annual Report).
• Adidas total 2023 emissions: approximately 6.1 million mtCO2e Scopes 1+2+3 (Commons brand assessment of Adidas disclosures).
• Puma 2030 Scope 1+2 SBTi target: 90% absolute reduction vs. 2017 baseline; Scope 3 target: 33% (Puma 2024 Annual Report).
• Puma 2024 renewable electricity at own sites: 100% via green tariffs and RECs (Puma 2024 Annual Report).
• Adidas 2024 recycled polyester penetration: 99% of feasible applications, versus Nike’s 63% in FY24 (Adidas 2024 disclosures; Nike FY24 Sustainability Data).

Source

Sources: https://manufacturingdigital.com/sustainability-esg/inside-adidas-approach-to-growth-and-sustainability https://report.adidas-group.com/2024/en/group-management-report-sustainability-statement/esrs-e1-climate-change/impact-risk-and-opportunity-management.html https://annual-report.puma.com/2024/en/combined-management-report/sustainability-statement/environmental-information/esrs-e1-climate-change/index.html https://about.puma.com/en/sustainability/our-targets

Nike’s FY24 disclosure is, by the standards of athletic and apparel peer reporting, unusually deep on operational decarbonization and unusually thin on post-2025 strategic clarity. The 74% Scope 1+2 reduction against FY15 is real and meaningful, achieved primarily through aggressive renewable electricity procurement (96% of own operations) and onsite generation, and is the deepest single-company result in the athletic sector. Materials substitution at scale (1.1 million mtCO2e in EPM-driven reductions, double the FY25 target) is the other clear win. The 36% reduction in manufacturing and transportation Scope 3 against a 0% target reflects both genuine supplier engagement (the Indonesia REC program, Tier 2 coal phase-out) and the deflating effect of lower production volumes in FY24. The Scope 3 SBTi target remains well off pace, and the dropped Use of Sold Products disclosure, while methodologically defensible, narrows the comparative envelope just as peers are widening theirs.

Three takeaways are portable to other companies. First, virtual PPAs and unbundled EACs at scale (Nike’s US and EU vPPAs supplied 270,032 MWh of renewable electricity in FY24) are how operational decarbonization actually moves in apparel and footwear, and the cost has dropped enough that the case is increasingly financial as well as climate-driven. Second, transparency on supplier audit non-compliance category by category, including the awkward findings (chemical management, working hours, safety), sets a credibility standard worth copying — but should not be confused with progress, since the underlying compliance rate has fallen. Third, the dropping of Use of Sold Products and the forthcoming restated SBTi target signal that Nike is entering a methodology-reset cycle, and other companies in the same position should expect their stakeholders to ask hard questions about what counts and what does not in the next disclosure round.