SPECIAL REPORT
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Photo credit: Kjewelry Accessories on Pexels.com.
Sustainability and CIBJO at 100:
reinforcing resilience and relevance
in a fragmenting world
By John Mulligan
President
CIBJO Sustainable Development Commission
As CIBJO marks its centenary, the global jewellery industry finds itself navigating a landscape that is at once familiar and profoundly changed. Whilst it can be argued that complexity has long been a defining feature of the sector – spanning diverse geographies, materials, supply chains, and business models – today, that complexity is increasingly accompanied by frictions and fragmentation.
Across markets and jurisdictions, expectations and priorities are diverging. Regulatory frameworks are evolving at different speeds and in different directions. A growing number of standards, initiatives and guidance materials have emerged, each seeking to address aspects of sustainability and responsible practice. At the same time, scrutiny from consumers, investors and civil society continues to intensify, bringing both opportunity and challenge.
For many companies – particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) – this environment can appear hard to interpret, and the future ever more difficult to predict and plan for. Questions remain around what is expected of the jewellery sector, what constitutes good practice, and how best to respond.
This sense of uncertainty may have been present before within the industry, but it persists today as part of a broader transition. Concurrently we have witnessed global geopolitical shifts and conflicts that have undermined long-established norms, and a socio-political environment in which assumptions of stability, predictability and open globalisation can no longer be taken for granted.
How then is the jewellery industry to respond and chart its path to continued resilience and relevance in an increasingly fragmented and uncertain global landscape? Some challenges are at least increasingly well known, even if solutions are far from universally understood or accepted.
Jewellery supply chains remain complex and dispersed, often spanning multiple countries and segmented groups of market actors, making transparency difficult and increasing exposure to social, environmental and governance (ESG) risks. At the same time, sustainability expectations are being formalised through regulation, with reporting, due diligence and traceability requirements becoming more specific and more directly tied to business practice. Recent research has mapped out some of these pressures and expectations.
Cross‑jurisdictional analysis from global law firm Baker McKenzie (and the Positive Luxury consultancy) recently suggests that 2026 may represent a pivotal moment for the jewellery sector as sustainability-focused regulations across major markets become more prescriptive, more interconnected and more operational in nature [1]. Their findings suggest global policymakers have entered a new phase in which rules on social and environmental risks and impacts move from principles‑based frameworks to more concrete expectations around evidence-based substantiated claims, traceable supply chains, and more structured climate and environmental impact reporting.
These developments sit alongside broader systemic pressures. The environmental footprint of mining and raw material extraction – particularly in informal and artisanal production – the challenge of measuring and influencing Scope 3 emissions across fragmented supply networks, and wider economic and consumer uncertainty in the luxury sector all contribute to a more demanding operating context. Together, regulatory complexity, cost pressures and shifting consumer dynamics can make sustainability appear burdensome, encouraging hesitation or leading some companies to only attempt minor incremental change.
That said, if there is a unifying theme within this evolving and splintered landscape, it is the growing centrality of sustainability. Over recent years, sustainability has moved decisively from the margins of industry discussion into its core. It is increasingly framed in terms of risk management, regulatory compliance, and reputational expectation. Yet to view it solely through these lenses is to risk underestimating its significance.
Sustainability should instead be understood as a foundation – one that underpins both the resilience of the jewellery industry and its continued relevance in a changing world. Emerging evidence suggests that, when approached strategically, sustainability can act not only as a response to risk, but as a driver of value, innovation and long-term growth. This point was made in last year’s Special Report from the Sustainable Development Commission but is being repeated here with perhaps even more force.
Photo credit: World Gold Council.
Resilience and relevance
Resilience, in this context, relates to the capacity of companies and supply chains to anticipate, absorb and adapt to disruption. It is reflected in the ability to identify and manage risks, to build robust systems of governance, and to maintain continuity in the face of uncertainty.
CIBJO’s responsible sourcing guidance has long emphasised these elements, highlighting the importance of due diligence, risk identification and mitigation as integral components of responsible business practice. To ensure its guidance remains up-to-date and fit for purpose, CIBJO will soon be releasing new versions of its Responsible Sourcing Book and Responsible Sourcing Toolkit.
Increasingly, however, resilience is also tied to the ability to manage upstream vulnerabilities and indirect impacts – whether linked to environmental and resource constraints, consumer confidence in the face geopolitical turmoil, or heightened market volatility – and to build supply chains that are both more transparent and more responsive and adaptable to different pressures.
Relevance, meanwhile, speaks to the relationship between the industry and the societies – and consumer segments – in which it operates. Jewellery has always carried meaning beyond its economic value. Today, that meaning is increasingly linked to questions of origin, impact, and integrity. Maintaining consumer confidence, and demonstrating alignment with broader social and environmental priorities, are therefore essential to preserving the value proposition of the product itself.
The regulatory response we described above suggests a puzzle which, although formed of pieces that are originally presented in a scattered, complicated set of pressures, are gradually connected to form a more unified and coherent picture.
There is considerable evidence that these shifts are reflected in – or reinforced by – changing consumer expectations. Buyers are increasingly seeking assurance regarding the provenance of materials and the conditions under which products are created, prompting greater emphasis on transparency, responsible sourcing and credible communication. But there also is, increasingly, a need to demonstrate awareness and policies that move beyond risk-based metrics focused primarily on more than minimising damage and harm towards a wider awareness of – and need to demonstrate – systemic “value creation” and positive socio-environmental impact.
Robust responsible sourcing policies are foundational for reputational and supply chain risk management, but if they are also to underpin both enduring resilience and relevance, they need to be combined with – and extended by – consideration of pressing systemic risks and our wider sustainability goals, oriented around the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [2].
However, to avoid accusations of greenwashing and to build trust, these considerations must be grounded in something concrete and of material relevance to a business. If companies now have to operate in conditions characterised by fragmentation and uncertainty, three qualities become critically important: consistency, credibility, and stability.
Photo credit: Bill Wegener on Unsplash.com.
Consistency and credibility
Consistency and credibility, in the first instance, relate to how sustainability is comprehended and communicated across the industry. This requires a common understanding – shared definitions, aligned terminology, and broadly comparable objectives.
Without this common ground, even well-intentioned efforts risk becoming difficult to interpret or evaluate. Companies may work towards similar objectives but interpret and describe them in different ways. Claims may be made but not easily substantiated. Trust, in such circumstances, becomes harder to establish and maintain.
The effort to address this challenge is reflected in the recent developments within CIBJO’s guidance. The updated Responsible Sourcing materials place particular emphasis on clarifying key principles and expectations, supporting a more consistent understanding and application of responsible sourcing practices across the jewellery sector. The application and implementation aspect of sourcing plans are laid out in a stepwise manner, and articulated through the structured Toolkit.
Additionally, and importantly, the wider context – essentially, how the jewellery industry is going to demonstrate its awareness of (and responses to) the overarching sustainability landscape (as expressed via the SDGs) – is addressed by CIBJO’s ESG and Sustainability Reference Guide. This substantial and comprehensive document should provide with industry professionals with a wide-ranging but sufficiently detailed reference point to allow companies and associations to equip themselves with sufficient and awareness and knowledge to build their own foundations
Yet consistency also has a broader dimension. As regulatory frameworks mature globally, there are signs of convergence in the type and quality of information that companies are expected to provide, particularly in areas such as traceability, environmental performance and substantiated claims. This gradual alignment, while not eliminating complexity, offers an opportunity to reduce fragmentation over time and to create a clearer basis for action.
John Mulligan, President of CIBJO’s Sustainability Development Commission, marked the imminent release of both CIBJO’s comprehensive ESG & Sustainability Reference Guide for the Jewellery Industry and version 2.0 of its Responsible Sourcing Blue Book and Toolkit, during a Jewellery Industry Voices session at VICENZAORO on January 17, 2026. The seminar considered how jewellery companies may better manage the potential risks in their supply chains, and considered how they might contribute to positive social and environmental outcomes.
Stability through shared goals and standards
Stability, meanwhile, refers to the manner in which sustainability commitments are implemented over time. It implies continuity, rather than episodic engagement; integration, rather than separation from core business processes; and a long-term perspective, rather than a series of short-term responses. It recognises that meaningful progress in sustainability is rarely achieved through isolated initiatives, but through sustained effort and continuous improvement.
CIBJO guidance has consistently emphasised this perspective, framing responsible sourcing not as a fixed state to be achieved, but as an ongoing process, evolving in response to changing circumstances and deepening understanding. That said, the apparent complexity of the
Importantly, stability does not imply rigidity. On the contrary, in a dynamic and uncertain environment, stability provides the structure within which adaptation can take place. It allows companies to respond to new challenges without losing coherence or direction.
Together, credibility, consistency and stability help form a bridge between fragmentation and coherence. They enable diverse actors, operating across varied contexts, to align around shared principles and approaches, while retaining the flexibility needed to address specific circumstances. This is, in essence, the value and purpose of a global educational organisation like CIBJO – to create the reference points and shared resources to serve as a beacon guiding companies towards common goals and practices, even though they are travelling in different waters via different routes.
These factors may also create the conditions for a another increasingly important outcome: the development of resilient and trusted value chains.
Advances in traceability and digitalisation illustrate this potential. Emerging technologies, including blockchain-based systems, are enabling more robust tracking of materials from source to market, strengthening transparency, reducing risks of substitution or fraud, and enhancing confidence in the provenance of products. Industry initiatives are already demonstrating how such approaches can establish new benchmarks for traceability and trust.
At the same time, greater consistency in standards and expectations can support interoperability across systems, allowing information to be shared more effectively by different entities along the value chain. Combined with sustained implementation over time, this creates the basis for supply chains that are not only more transparent, but also more co-operative and mutually supportive. This collective resilience is likely more capable of adapting to regulatory change, responding to stakeholder expectations, and managing risk more effectively. It can also empower companies to think of the wider impacts of their operations, practices and products on a wider set of stakeholders.
This, in turn, highlights a central role for CIBJO itself.
CIBJO’s role in process
For a century, CIBJO has contributed to the development of shared standards and common reference points within the jewellery industry. In the current context, this role takes on renewed importance. The objective is not to replace the many existing frameworks and initiatives that now exist, but to help align them and make them more easily comprehensible – to provide a point of orientation for the global jewellery market within an increasingly complex landscape.
Through its Sustainable Development Commission, and its substantial range of reference and implementation tools – its Responsible Sourcing Blue Book and Toolkit, its ESG & Sustainability Reference Guide [3], and the ESG Wheel, its Measurement Guidance and soon-to-be published Double Materiality Assessment Guide [4] – CIBJO is working to create a framework that is both comprehensive and practical. These resources are intended to support companies in understanding their responsibilities, identifying their priorities, and taking proportionate action– irrespective of size or position within the supply chain.
Particular attention has been given to accessibility. It is recognised that not all companies will progress at the same pace, nor have access to the same resources. The aim, therefore, is not to establish uniformity, but to enable participation – to ensure that even the smallest entities are able to engage meaningfully in moving from sustainability aspirations to demonstrable progress.
CIBJO is not the only industry body seeking to drive and encourage greater sectoral participation and progress, and its endeavours and outputs should be viewed alongside complementary work from the Watch & Jewellery Initiative 2030 [5], Responsible Jewellery Council [6], the Gold Principles Group [7] and others. Indeed, there is an evident trend of greater cooperation and collaboration across these entities as they seek to drive and support industry progress.
In many of these organisations, there is also an increasing recognition of the need to move beyond a narrow focus on sourcing alone. While responsible sourcing remains foundational, sustainability encompasses a broader range of environmental, social and governance considerations. Issues such as climate change, biodiversity, human rights, labour practices, and transparency in disclosures and communication are all becoming more prominent.
CIBJO’s guidance reflects this broader perspective, offering a structured approach that considers the industry’s impacts and responsibilities across People, Planet and Product.
As the scope of sustainability expands, so too does the importance of credibility. In a landscape where claims are increasingly scrutinised, the ability to demonstrate progress – clearly, consistently and transparently – becomes essential.
Photo credit: Plato Terentev on Pexels.com.
Materiality and measurement
This points to the growing role of measurement. Defining appropriate indicators, tracking performance over time, and communicating outcomes in a credible way are all necessary steps in reinforcing trust. Without such mechanisms, sustainability risks remaining aspirational rather than demonstrable.
These issues are addressed in the implementation tools mentioned above – understanding what is of relevance to a company (and what can be credibly acted upon) are covered in the new Double Materiality Assessment Guide and progress can be measured via the ESG Performance Guidelines [8].
Ultimately, the transition towards a more sustainable jewellery industry is a shared endeavour. It involves actors from across the entire value chain, from miners, distributors, polishers and refiners to brands, retailers, and industry bodies. It is shaped not only by internal decisions within companies, but by the expectations of regulators, the priorities of investors, and the evolving values of consumers.
In this context, credibility, consistency and stability are not merely operational considerations; they are collective responsibilities. They require alignment, cooperation, and a willingness to engage with common frameworks, even within a diverse and decentralised sector.
They also point toward a broader opportunity. While fragmentation remains a defining feature of the current landscape, the gradual convergence of standards, the strengthening of shared approaches, and the development of more transparent and accountable value chains together suggest a pathway toward greater coherence over time.
Framework for the future
As CIBJO enters its second century, the question is not whether the jewellery industry will continue to evolve – of course it will – but how that evolution is managed, and whether it results in positive and beneficial outcomes
In a world that may remain turbulent and, yes, fragmented, there is an opportunity for the jewellery industry to respond with clarity and coherence. By focusing on consistency in how sustainability is defined and communicated, by embedding stability in how it is implemented over time, and by supporting alignment across different actors and initiatives, the industry can strengthen its foundations.
In doing so, sustainability becomes more than a response to external pressures or scattered aspirations. It becomes a means of reinforcing the industry’s resilience, of building trusted and adaptive value chains, and of ensuring the jewellery industry’s relevance in the years ahead.
It becomes, in effect, a shared framework for the future.
FOOTNOTES
1.https://www.bakermckenzie.com/-/media/files/insight/guides/2026/pl-esg-policy-guide-2026.pdf
2. To simplify consideration of the UN SDGs for jewellery SMEs, CIBJO produced the “ESG Wheel“ which maps particular goals to actions associated with specific ESG ‘Principles’
3. There key reference guides were produced in collaboration with sustainability consultant Andrew Cooper of www.andrewcooper-consulting.com
4. These latter implementation guides were produced in collaboration with ESG consultants at Key & Co.
5. https://www.wjinitiative2030.org/
6. https://www.responsiblejewellery.com/
7. https://goldprinciples.org/ – the Gold Principles Group is useful example of cross-sectoral and cross-value chain collaboration and pulls together a wide range of sourcing and sustainability resources from all the aforementioned organisations and others – see https://goldprinciples.org/progress.
8. That is, the Guidelines for Measuring ESG Performance in the Jewellery Industry and Supply Chain.
