Kia
Kia makes the first-wave Top 5 because its 2025 sustainability report is structured and metric-facing (GRI/SASB/TCFD references) and includes specific circular-material and low-carbon-steel intentions, which is stronger than typical automotive brand-level ESG disclosure.
Score
85
Industry
Automotive
Country
South Korea
Report year
2025
Badge
Eligible to use the sustainablereports badge
Score breakdown
Resource efficiency
88Clear public commitments on recycled/bio-based materials and circular supply-chain setup, with concrete targets for recycled plastics in Europe.
Impact on environment
85Carbon-neutrality direction (2045) and RE100 direction (2040) are visible, though outcome credibility depends on execution speed and scale.
Social responsibility
83Supply-chain and human-rights coverage exists and is readable, but deeper value-chain labor outcome evidence still needs strengthening.
Economic benefits
84Profitability and EV momentum support a durable transition narrative, but automotive cyclicality and battery supply constraints remain real risks.
Certifications and signals
Evidence and sources
Kia Sustainability Report 2025 (MOVE, PDF)
Kia
Sustainability report referencing GRI/SASB/TCFD and covering climate, circularity, supply chain, and governance.
View sourceKia sustainability report page
Kia
Official ESG page linking to sustainability report downloads.
View sourceRelated reports
Related rankings
About us
Independent research. No brand sponsorships.
sustainablereports.org organizes public sustainability reports, certifications, and evidence into editorial research pages. We do not accept brand sponsorships, we do not sell ranking positions, and we do not offer paid inclusion.
Badge usage policy
Only brands that have earned a place in one of our “Top 10 sustainable products/brands” rankings may display the sustainablereports badge. Brands outside those rankings may not use it.
Editorial policy
Conclusions are not adjusted for partnerships, marketing budgets, or brand relationships. Rankings and company pages reflect only the quality of public disclosure and evidence available at the time of review.