One line in a tender might do more for sustainability than another 100 page sustainability report.
Spinifex is an opinion column. If you would like to contribute, contact us to ask for a detailed brief.
That might sound provocative. Yet changes in Europe and Australia, alongside the World Bank’s work on green public procurement, suggest it is not as far-fetched as it first appears.
Sustainable procurement has been developing for years. The pieces are now starting to fit together.
From disclosure to decisions
Recent research analysing more than 15,000 sustainability disclosures found that sustainability reporting and the use of voluntary frameworks have grown significantly.
Yet as reporting became more widespread, disclosures became less specific and less quantitative on average. They also contained more vague or promotional language.
Reporting matters because it should lead to better decisions.
Procurement is where sustainability information can start influencing commercial decisions. It can affect which materials are specified, which suppliers make a shortlist and who wins the contract.
For the property, construction and infrastructure sectors, that gives procurement considerable influence.
That matters because procurement requirements travel through supply chains. When a major buyer asks for credible evidence, suppliers have a commercial reason to measure, verify and improve performance.
Europe is moving closer to products
From 12 August 2026, the EU’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation generally starts to apply. It introduces requirements covering areas including recyclability, recycled content, reuse and waste prevention. These requirements move environmental performance closer to the products companies place on the market.
From 27 September 2026, EU member states must apply measures introduced through the directive on empowering consumers for the green transition.
These measures strengthen consumer protection against greenwashing. Generic environmental claims face tighter restrictions, sustainability labels need stronger foundations and claims about future environmental performance need clear, verifiable commitments.
Put plainly, the August rules focus on what is in the product. The September rules affect what a business can say about it.
The Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation is another example of environmental requirements moving closer to products and markets.
Businesses increasingly need evidence to support how they describe their sustainability performance.
Australia is putting evidence into tenders
Australia is taking a different route. Under the Australian Government’s Environmentally Sustainable Procurement Policy, suppliers in selected procurement categories may need to complete sustainability plans, substantiate environmental claims and provide environmental data.
Since 1 July 2025, the policy has applied to four high-impact procurement categories. These include construction services valued at $7.5 million or more and selected product procurements valued at $1 million or more.
Sustainability information that once sat on page 73 of an annual report is now appearing in tender responses, where it may influence who gets the contract.
Hunter Joint Organisation’s circular procurement toolkit shows what this can look like in practice. Developed for its member councils, it includes supplier forms, evidence requirements, procurement guidance and model contract clauses. It also provides targeted guidance for procuring lower-carbon concrete.
The toolkit turns circular procurement ambitions into requirements that council officers, engineers, asset managers and suppliers can use in existing procurement processes.
This shift reaches beyond Australia and Europe. In April 2026, the World Bank published Tackling climate change through green public procurement alongside its broader guidance for implementing sustainable procurement.
Across different markets, environmental evidence is moving closer to purchasing decisions.
What suppliers will need to prove
The commercial question is shifting towards what suppliers need to prove to win the work.
That gives credible product-level evidence greater commercial importance, including:
- Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs)
- product carbon footprints
- Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs)
- recycled-content evidence
- transparent methodologies
- comparable environmental data
The quality of this evidence matters. Different methods and boundaries can produce numbers that appear comparable but are not. Recognised standards, transparent assumptions and independent verification help buyers understand what the information covers.
Buyers also need to decide which evidence is relevant, how they will assess it and what weight environmental performance will carry.
A sustainability question that has no influence on tender scoring risks becoming another box ticking exercise. A contract clause that no one monitors is unlikely to change delivery.
Buyer by buyer variation creates another risk. If every buyer develops a different questionnaire, methodology and carbon boundary, businesses could exchange reporting overload for procurement overload.
Requirements should be consistent and proportionate to the value, environmental impact and risk of the procurement. Smaller and regional suppliers should not be excluded because a buyer has requested expensive evidence that is unnecessary for the decision.
Recognised standards and consistent methodologies can reduce this burden. They give buyers information they can compare and suppliers evidence they can use across more than one tender.
Done well, procurement can turn sustainability commitments into demand.
