Green Procurement Playbook 2025

Building block 3 Strategic business case I II III IV Focus area Compliance driver Risk manager Value creator Sustainability leader Business case development and framing— No formal business case built for green procur ement; sustainability is seen as a cost, not a value driver . — Procur ement lacks frameworks, data and support to quantify sustainability impact. — Sustainability benefits are loosely referenced but not part of investment criteria or sour cing logic. — No shared language or ownership for developing or endorsing sustainability cases.— Business cases are developed reactively , focused on cost premiums and risk avoidance. — Procur ement may include basic sustainability facts but lacks robust financial translation. — Limited collaboration with finance or sustainability teams; cases often lack credibility . — Green options are prepar ed but not promoted due to uncertainty about acceptance.— Business cases integrate financial, risk and sustainability metrics into a structur ed narrative. — Procur ement co-develops cases with finance and sustainability , leveraging inter nal carbon pricing or lifecycle costing. — Cases are adapted for different decision-makers (e.g. CFO, commer cial, product) to gain buy-in. — Emphasis is placed on both operational impact and strategic alignment (e.g. brand, resilience).— Framing of green procur ement is proactive, strategic and standar dized. — Procur ement uses advanced tools to translate sustainability into business value (e.g. abatement cost, avoided risk, futur e cost of inaction). — Clear messaging connects procur ement actions to corporate goals (e.g. SBT i, licence to operate, customer value). — Business cases shift perception of sustainability from "premium cost" to "strategic investment”. — Sustainability is not included in investment or procur ement decision- making frameworks. — Green options are evaluated on cost alone, with no formal mechanism to elevate trade-of fs. — No central budget or pathway to fund sustainability-r elated premiums. — Appr ovals are siloed, with little visibility of long-term envir onmental impact.— Sustainability enters investment conversations when tied to compliance or reputational risk. — Project teams must escalate green trade-of fs to get leadership support – often inconsistently . — Decisions to pay a premium are made ad hoc, without guiding principles or escalation paths. — Procur ement teams act as advisors but lack decision-making authority or investment tools.— Gover nance requir es sustainability to be explicitly consider ed in relevant sour cing and investment decisions. — Cross-functional reviews assess financial viability alongside sustainability impact. — CO2 impact and carbon- adjusted cost are included in appr oval templates for large projects. — Dedicated review forums or escalation mechanisms help resolve cost- sustainability trade-of fs.— Sustainability is fully embedded in gover nance processes for procur ement and capital allocation. — Strategic projects can access dedicated funds, adjusted ROI thresholds or corporate-level backing. — Decision-makers are equipped to evaluate sustainability and cost trade-of fs holistically . — The C-suite and boar d champion green procur ement as critical to long-term business success.Gover nance and investment decision-making Note: SBTi = Science Based Targets initiative, ROI = return on investment. Green Procurement Playbook: The CPO’s Guide to Delivering Value for Business and Planet 12