Proof is in the pudding

For most hotels, the data behind disclosures would not yet survive serious scrutiny. Not because of bad intent — because we built sustainability reporting as a communications exercise before we built it as a data exercise. We describe ambition well. We evidence progress less well. And that gap is exactly where credibility risk now sits.

I see this from the inside every day. At RHG we run a Verified Net Zero Hotels program where every property is independently verified by TÜV Rheinland across Scopes 1, 2, and 3. If the data does not hold up, the hotel does not get verified. That discipline is uncomfortable. It forces you to deal with what is real rather than what reads well. But that is exactly the point — a claim without evidence is just a sentence.

On technology, my concern is straightforward. There are many system solutions available and some are genuinely useful. But none of them replace real hotel input. If you want data that is verifiable and certifiable — for sustainability certifications, for CSRD, for net zero verification — you need someone at the property who knows whether the energy contract is actually 100% renewable or just labeled that way. Someone who can confirm the kitchen changed its menus rather than just relabeled the same dishes. AI can organize, analyze, and flag inconsistencies. That has value. But if the underlying data is thin, a generative layer on top just produces better-formatted uncertainty. And the speed at which AI can generate plausible disclosure text far exceeds the speed at which hotels can generate the operational evidence to support it. We should be honest about that asymmetry.

There is also a labeling problem we need to talk about. A lot of what our industry presents as sustainability is simply guest service. Bike rentals. EV charging. Refillable water bottles. Digital check-in. These are fine things — some of them are just good hospitality. Calling them sustainability achievements inflates the narrative and makes it harder for guests, corporate buyers, and investors to distinguish between what is meaningful and what is marketing. When everything is labeled sustainability, nothing stands out.

Real impact disclosure means reporting what changed, by how much, verified by whom, and whether progress is on track against a credible target. It means being willing to show where you are falling short, not just where you look good. That is harder than collecting logos, but it is the only version that will hold up.

And one thing I feel strongly about: data should serve performance, not just compliance. The moment sustainability data becomes something hotels produce for a report rather than use to run a better operation, we have lost the purpose of collecting it. It should also serve the guest — not by overwhelming them with claims at every touchpoint, but by giving them confidence that the hotel they are in is genuinely well run and responsible. That is not a sustainability message. That is a hospitality standard.