Mexico is entering 2026 at a pivotal moment in its environmental, social, and governance (ESG) journey. As regulatory expectations intensify and global markets demand greater transparency, mid-market organisations face both structural challenges and strategic opportunities. Findings from RSM’s 2025 Latin America ESG Landscape survey, conducted with over 250 companies across the region, show that Mexican businesses must close technical gaps, strengthen governance integration, and connect sustainability performance with financial outcomes.

While progress is visible in governance and climate prioritisation, execution gaps remain - particularly in reporting maturity, IFRS readiness, and data capability. With the entry into force of mandatory sustainability reporting in Mexico under Sustainability Reporting Standards for private companies, as well as for publicly listed companies in compliance with IFRS S1 and S2, starting from fiscal year 2025 to be published in 2026, the focus must shift from conceptual alignment to disciplined operational implementation.

This executive summary outlines Mexico’s key findings, strategic implications, and recommended actions for middle market leaders.

1. ESG reporting and disclosure

Key findings

  • Only 15.4% of Mexican companies prioritise ESG reporting, below the LATAM average of 26.5%.
  • 71.8% have not yet implemented standards such as NIS and IFRS S1/S2.
  • Only 5.2% are at an advanced stage of implementation.

Strategic implications

Mexico lags behind the regional average in prioritizing ESG reporting, indicating a significant preparedness gap ahead of the mandatory standards starting in 2025.

The transition ahead is not simply about producing reports. ESG disclosure must evolve into integrated reporting frameworks that include:

  • Material KPIs aligned to business strategy
  • Data traceability and internal controls
  • External assurance readiness
  • Clear linkage between ESG metrics and financial performance

Mid-market organisations that move early toward integrated, auditable ESG reporting will strengthen access to tenders, improve risk pricing, reduce capital costs, and position themselves as credible partners in global supply chains.

2. Corporate governance and ESG risk management

Key findings

  • 51.3% of companies prioritise corporate governance.
  • 43.6% prioritise ESG risk management.
  • Combined, governance and ESG risk reach 66.7% of reported priorities.

Strategic implications

Governance and risk oversight are recognised priorities in Mexico. However, the next step is operational integration.

Boards must move from oversight awareness to structured implementation by:

  • Embedding ESG risks into enterprise risk management frameworks
  • Developing climate scenario analyses
  • Establishing ESG risk maps
  • Allocating dedicated mitigation budgets

For mid-market organisations, this evolution ensures resilience, alignment with global standards, and enhanced credibility with investors and international partners. Governance structures must demonstrate that ESG oversight directly informs strategic planning and capital allocation decisions.

3. Climate change and GHG emissions

Key findings

  • 64.1% of companies prioritise climate-related issues.
  • 25.6% focus specifically on climate change.
  • 12.8% prioritise greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Strategic implications

Climate is a leading ESG priority in Mexico, but emphasis remains broader on climate themes rather than measurable emissions reduction. By 2026, expectations will shift toward:

  • Comprehensive GHG inventories (Scopes 1, 2, and 3)
  • Traceable emission factors
  • Long-term decarbonisation targets (2030 and 2050)
  • Institutionalised external assurance of climate data

Climate integration into capital allocation and operational efficiency will increasingly influence competitiveness and financing conditions.

4. Structural challenges

Key findings

  • 30.8% of companies report a lack of technical skills.
  • 15.4% struggle with KPI measurement.

Strategic implications

Technical capability remains a central barrier to ESG maturity in Mexico.

To meet regulatory and assurance expectations in 2026, organisations must prioritise:

  • Automation of ESG data collection
  • Strengthened data governance frameworks
  • Internal controls supporting audit readiness
  • Cross-functional technical upskilling

Automation will be particularly critical for mid-market organisations seeking to streamline operations, reduce reporting risk, and improve data quality.

5. The evolving role of the Head of Sustainability

Key findings

  • Companies without a Head of Sustainability prioritise more technical topics (69%).
  • Companies with a Head emphasise cultural aspects (30%).

Strategic implications

The sustainability leadership role in Mexico is at an inflection point. For mid-market organisations, elevating this role from operational reporting to strategic leadership will be critical for embedding ESG across governance, finance, and operations.

6. IFRS readiness

Key findings

  • Only 15.4% of Mexican companies are ready for NIS and IFRS S1/S2.
  • The LATAM average is 26.6%.

Strategic implications

Mexico lags behind the regional average in preparedness for NIS and IFRS, creating urgency ahead of mandatory compliance starting in fiscal year 2025, to be published in 2026. Organizations must move from awareness to execution through:

  • Implementation of structured governance frameworks
  • Development of integrated reporting capabilities
  • Ensuring data comparability and traceability
  • Preparation for external assurance

Key considerations for Columbian businesses in 2026

  • Close the preparedness gap for NIS and IFRS S1/S2: With only 15.4% of Mexican companies ready for NIS and IFRS S1/S2 and 71.8% still not having implemented them, organizations could accelerate structured implementation. This may include conducting formal gap assessments, assigning governance responsibilities, and developing integrated reporting that more directly links ESG disclosures with financial performance and risk exposure.
  • Converting governance priority into risk execution. While 51.3% prioritise governance and 43.6% ESG risk management (66.7% combined), boards may wish to further formalise ESG integration into enterprise risk frameworks. This can include climate scenario analysis, ESG risk mapping, and allocating mitigation budgets within strategic planning cycles.
  • Address technical and KPI capability gaps: With 30.8% citing a lack of technical skills and 15.4% struggling with KPI measurement, greater investment in automation and centralized ESG data systems could support improved outcomes. Strengthening internal controls and data traceability may also enhance readiness for assurance.
  • Moving from climate awareness to measurable emissions control. Although 64.1% prioritise climate issues, only 12.8% focus specifically on GHG emissions. Organisations could consider implementing full Scope 1, 2, and 3 inventories, applying traceable emission factors, and setting credible 2030/2050 reduction targets aligned with financial planning.
  • Strengthening sustainability leadership impact. Given the structural differences in prioritisation between companies with and without a Head of Sustainability, organisations may benefit from further elevating this role into a technical-strategic function responsible for ESG data governance, assurance preparation, and linking sustainability KPIs to growth strategy.
     

Complete the following form to download the full report: