'That Era Is Ending': Why Investors' Approach To Sustainability Shifted From Reporting To Performance

In 2026, capital no longer rewards activity for the sake of activity. Instead, it is rewarding real operational performance that changes outcomes.

This is the message from Katie Whipp, chief business officer at Re:sustain. For years, sustainability in real estate has been dominated by reporting and making disclosures for the sake of ratings and certifications.

“This is necessary but is often detached from how buildings actually run day to day,” Whipp said. “That era is ending. The market is starting to reward hard, verifiable gains — not activity dressed up as progress.”

Bisnow spoke to Whipp about how investors, occupiers and lenders have moved their focus past reporting towards how buildings perform in real time, and whether that performance improves returns and resilience.

Bisnow: What is driving investors’ change of focus when it comes to assets’ sustainability?

Whipp: In today’s market, outcomes matter more. As interest rates ease and capital cautiously re-enters the market, investment decisions are becoming more forensic. 

This is not the yield-compression cycle of 2021. It is a more disciplined market where capital follows evidence, not narratives. 

As a result, we’re seeing that underwriting is more tied to capital expenditure planning visibility, operational efficiency and cost control, even energy exposure and price risk. Investors and lenders are considering long-term asset resilience. 

We’re at the point where operational intelligence has become a financial variable. Crucially, performance only counts when it shows up in cashflow, risk and resilience — not just in a slide deck.

Bisnow: Why doesn’t reporting provide the improvements that the industry needs?

Whipp: Over the past five years, UK businesses have invested heavily in carbon dashboards, disclosure platforms, environmental, social and corporate governance data rooms and GRESB alignment. These tools tick regulatory and investor boxes. They offer comfort.  

But these reporting tools sit downstream. They aggregate what exists; they do not fix how buildings operate. There has been measurement. There has not always been management.  

The result is a familiar trap: activity masquerading as progress. Data is produced, reports are filed, but the plant is still poorly tuned, assets still leak energy, and risk profiles do not materially change. The industry has spent a decade proving it is doing things; now it has to prove those things actually work.

Bisnow: Are any other countries further ahead in this transition?

Whipp: In parts of continental Europe, the emphasis has shifted from reporting towards operational infrastructure and execution. 

Owners and managers are already cleaning and structuring asset-level data, integrating building management systems and controls into a coherent data layer. They are aligning engineering teams with asset and fund strategy and linking operational data directly to capex and value decisions.

Where this works, the question has moved from “What do we report?” to “What do we change?” That is the difference between performance as narrative and performance as discipline.

Bisnow: What is the biggest driver of this change?

Whipp: First, corporate occupiers. They are asking better, outcome-focused questions and are no longer satisfied with green labels and glossy ESG summaries.

They want to know how a building performs in use and how resilient it is in extreme heat, flooding or grid stress, because these are the questions that matter. If they are considering a property, they want to know what operational improvements are planned and in what timeline.

This is a result of how climate risk is now operational risk. Recent flooding, heatwaves and wildfire-related disruptions across Europe have reinforced a simple truth: Buildings must perform under stress.

Operational performance and climate resilience are converging. This is no longer about annual energy intensity averages. It is about dynamic response capability: how an asset behaves hour by hour when conditions are worst, and whether that behaviour reduces losses, downtime and insurance exposure.

Occupiers will then use this operational transparency as part of their own workplace brand and employee engagement. They are forcing the bar to rise. Performance only matters if it changes employee experience, business continuity and cost — not just because a new system was installed.

Bisnow: How are occupier demands impacting the lending market?

Whipp: Lenders are also tightening their focus on how assets behave in the real world. Debt is increasingly structured around elements such as energy performance risk and exposure, credible transition pathways over the financing term, and capex visibility and affordability. 

In all this, longevity is the focus. Operational opacity now shows up as financing risk. Saying that “we did something” such as a retrofit, a pilot or a dashboard is not enough. Lenders want to see that interventions have changed default risk, not just reporting narratives.

Amid this evolution, finding climate solutions is no longer enough. Solutions need to demonstrate return on investment, how they impact margins, how risk is reduced to make an asset or fund more resilient. 

While climate change impact remains critical, it no longer carries the entire commercial argument. The work has to stand up as an operational and financial upgrade in its own right.

Bisnow: How do you think the industry will demonstrate improved operational performance in the future?

Whipp: The UK still lacks strong certifications focused on live operational performance rather than design intent or reporting quality. There is a clear gap for programmes that reward demonstrated, in-use performance, as well as continuous optimisation rather than one-off projects.

Overall, we need to religiously focus on outcomes and be explicit about what good looks like. It can’t be measured just because we did something, because that is theatre. Intervention without outcomes is noise. 

This article was produced in collaboration between Re:sustain and Studio B. Bisnow news staff was not involved in the production of this content.

Studio B is Bisnow’s in-house content and design studio. To learn more about how Studio B can help your team, reach out to studio@bisnow.com.