For years, corporate sustainability has centered on one dominant ambition: net zero. Companies have set emissions targets, expanded renewable energy use and published decarbonization plans. But as climate risks intensify, water is emerging as the next critical ESG priority.
Water affects business continuity, supply-chain resilience, public health, biodiversity and community relations. Industries such as agriculture, food and beverage, mining, energy, pharmaceuticals, textiles, semiconductors and data centers all depend on reliable water supplies. In water-stressed regions, scarcity or pollution can disrupt operations, increase costs and create reputational and regulatory risks.
This is driving interest in water positivity—the idea that companies should create more positive water-related outcomes than the negative impacts associated with their operations. These outcomes may include reducing withdrawals, improving water efficiency, treating wastewater, restoring watersheds, recharging aquifers and supporting community access to safe water.
However, water positivity is not as straightforward as measuring carbon emissions. Water is a local and shared resource. A liter saved or replenished in one region cannot automatically compensate for water consumed in another, particularly when the two locations face very different levels of scarcity.
That is why companies must move beyond simple water-balancing claims. WWF has cautioned that net positive water approaches can create misleading impressions if they focus on volumes rather than basin health, community needs and long-term water governance. It recommends that companies clearly explain how water-positive or replenishment claims are measured and supported.
A credible water strategy should begin with reducing operational water use and pollution. Companies should then assess risks across their facilities and supply chains, particularly in high-risk watersheds. They should invest in context-specific solutions such as wastewater treatment, rainwater harvesting, wetland restoration, groundwater recharge and sustainable irrigation.
Cargill’s work with the World Resources Institute (WRI) provides one example of this approach. Together, they developed water targets informed by local watershed conditions and water-related risks across Cargill’s operations and agricultural supply chains. The initiative illustrates how companies can align water stewardship with the specific needs of the regions where they operate, rather than relying solely on overall water-use reductions.
Most importantly, water stewardship requires collaboration. Businesses cannot secure shared water resources by acting alone. Governments, local communities, suppliers, investors and other water users must work together to improve watershed resilience and governance. WWF describes water stewardship as a collective effort that extends beyond a company’s own facilities and includes responsible management of river basins.
Boards and investors should look beyond how many liters a company uses. They should assess the quality of water targets, monitoring practices, community involvement and independent verification of reported benefits.
Water positivity could become an important next step in corporate ESG—but only if it delivers meaningful, measurable improvements for businesses, people and nature. The future of water strategy will not be defined by the biggest claim, but by credible action at the watershed level.
Join ESG Next Toronto on 20 April 2027 to explore the future of sustainability reporting, climate action, responsible business and practical ESG strategies with industry leaders, investors and policymakers.