Hall of Fame: Sustainability statements in hospitality

As the holiday season approaches and people prepare for their winter getaways, it’s the perfect moment to check in on how the hospitality sector is progressing in sustainability reporting. This edition of the Hall of Fame spotlights sustainability statement examples from hotel companies in Europe.

Scandic Hotels Group

Double Materiality Assessment ★★★★☆ (4/5)

Scandic Hotels identifies 20 material impacts, risks and opportunities (IROs), a manageable amount that achieves a strong balance across the value chain. The IROs are derived from the AR 16 list (now restructured into Appendix A in the revised ESRS 1) and include clear, well-defined descriptions. However, the consideration of dependencies is not mentioned, leaving an important dimension of the DMA process unaddressed. Overall, the DMA process is explained concisely and effectively, outlining the thresholds applied and the comprehensive stakeholder engagement approach, which combined surveys and interviews. The DMA section places slightly more emphasis on the outcomes than on the process, which keeps the information focused and relevant for stakeholders.

Communication & visuals ★★★☆☆ (3/5)

The report is visually simple and aligned with Scandic Hotels’ branding, but overall lacks creativity and relies heavily on text. The value chain graphic stands out as the most engaging visual element, though more illustrations and data visualisation would help elevate readability. Language is generally clear, though there are some minor grammatical and flow inconsistencies.

Navigation & structure ★★★☆☆ (3/5)

Navigation of the PDF works smoothly, allowing readers to move easily between sections by clicking on the navigation tabs. Sub-headings are clear and follow the ESRS logic. However, the absence of ESRS tagging throughout the sustainability statement is a drawback, as this reduces usability for readers seeking specific disclosures.

Valamar

Double Materiality Assessment ★★★★☆ (4/5)

Valamar identifies 17 material IROs, maintaining a manageable and well-balanced distribution across impacts, risks and opportunities. The report provides good coverage of both process and outcome, giving readers a well-rounded understanding of the DMA approach and results. Their approach begins with the former AR 16 list and outlines which internal departments (finance, HR, legal, etc.) contributed to identifying IROs. Valamar also leverages the SASB sector standard to support the assessment of value chain impacts. This practice is encouraged under the ESRS to identify entity-specific topics. As with Scandic, the report does not indicate how dependencies were considered.

Communication & visuals ★★★★☆ (4/5)

The report includes engaging imagery, but data visualisation (charts, diagrams) and illustrations remain basic and limited. Including more of these creative elements would have elevated the report by improving clarity and reducing text density. The language used throughout the report is clear and thorough, though some areas could be more concise. In addition, storytelling is limited, which may reflect a deliberate choice to maintain a technical tone.

Navigation & structure ★★★★★ (5/5)

The structure of the sustainability statement is consistent, logical and easy to navigate. Valamar makes effective use of ESRS tags, including placing them at the start of sections, helping readers quickly identify relevant information — a strong usability feature.

Accor

Double Materiality Assessment ★★★★☆ (4/5)

Accor identifies 33 material IROs, which is on the higher end and may be considered extensive for a DMA, as managing such a large number of IROs can weaken their focus. The report distinguishes itself from others because of its inclusion of a materiality matrix — a rare and valuable addition that supports visual engagement. The DMA process is highly detailed and transparent, covering thresholds, scoring methodologies and a wide range of stakeholders. Accor’s engagement with nearly 50 external stakeholders is particularly noteworthy and demonstrates sector-leading ambition. IROs are well balanced, and unlike the other two companies, Accor explicitly considers dependencies in the process, strengthening the assessment considerably.

Communication & visuals ★★★☆☆ (3/5)

The report is informative but visually underdeveloped, with limited imagery and colours, and few data visualisations, resulting in a dense, text-heavy experience. The value chain illustration stands out for being informative and creative, but similar visuals throughout would have significantly added to the creativity of the report. The language of the sustainability statement is quite technical, consistent with the tone of the rest of the Universal Registration Document. 

Navigation & structure ★★★☆☆ (3/5)

Navigation features are helpful given the length of the document, but the lack of ESRS tagging is a missed opportunity. Section dividers or clearer visual breaks would help improve flow and reader experience, particularly between material topic sections.