It’s been a big month of learning. Across the public and private sectors, climate-related reporting and assurance training has accelerated — a clear sign that Australia is moving from policy design to practical delivery. I was fortunate to take part in several technical programs recently, which deepened my understanding of both greenhouse gas (GHG) assurance and climate-risk assessment.
Without sharing any confidential content, I want to reflect at a high level on what stood out — and why it matters.
1. Climate risk is now a governance issue, not a niche
A recurring theme across all programs was that climate risk is no longer an environmental add-on. It’s being embedded into enterprise risk management, financial planning and audit oversight. Public agencies and listed entities alike are being trained to treat climate risk using the same rigour as other strategic risks — complete with defined responsibilities, accountability structures and periodic reviews.
The message: governance drives credibility. Board and executive oversight of climate-related risks is becoming mandatory, not optional.
2. Greenhouse gas reporting is becoming standard audit territory
Training in GHG accounting underscored how much attention is shifting to data quality, boundary setting, and assurance readiness.
Even at a conceptual level, it’s clear that the next few years will see rapid growth in sustainability assurance — from limited to reasonable assurance engagements under ASSA 5000, mirroring financial audit practice.
For practitioners, the implications are practical: learning to interpret activity data, apply emission factors correctly, and understand materiality in the context of non-financial reporting. For entities, it’s about building systems robust enough to withstand audit testing.
3. Proportionality and scalability are key
Not every organisation has the same exposure, resources, or data maturity. Training discussions emphasised the concept of proportionality — ensuring that climate-related disclosures and assurance work are scaled appropriately to entity size and complexity, while still meeting the spirit of the standard.
This idea will help smaller organisations participate meaningfully without being overwhelmed, and help auditors focus effort where the greatest risks lie.
4. Adaptation and resilience are gaining attention
Beyond emissions and compliance, climate-risk practitioners are talking more about adaptation pathways — structured, staged approaches to resilience planning. Rather than one-off assessments, entities are encouraged to design “pathways” that trigger action as new information or thresholds are reached. This type of forward-looking planning connects sustainability reporting with long-term service continuity and asset resilience.
Why this matters
For both the public and private sectors, these capability-building efforts mark a shift from awareness to competence. Climate risk and emissions assurance are no longer theoretical — they are becoming day-to-day professional responsibilities.
As auditors, accountants and analysts, we’re being asked to translate complex environmental data into reliable, decision-useful information. That requires not just technical skill but judgement, scepticism and ethical awareness — the same principles that define our profession.
The work ahead is challenging, but it’s meaningful. Every training session, every new framework, brings us closer to a profession that can help navigate Australia’s low-carbon transition with integrity and confidence.
Barry Li | Climate Reporting & Assurance 