Business travel emissions have dropped by 34% since 2019 among the world’s leading companies, yet Merck, Bosch, and JPMorgan Chase are bucking the trend by increasing their corporate flying. These findings come from the latest Travel Smart Ranking, which analyzes air travel emissions and reduction targets of 326 global corporations.
The overall decline in emissions is encouraging, with companies reducing unnecessary flights and embracing remote collaboration. However, this progress is at risk due to the actions of a small number of high-flying firms without clear targets. Among the worst performers are Merck, Bosch, and JPMorgan Chase, which have increased their emissions by 29%, 3%, and 41% respectively since 2019.
These increases come at a time when most peer companies are moving in the opposite direction. AstraZeneca, for instance, has reduced its business flying by 52% since 2019 after setting a specific travel emissions target. Similarly, Tetra Pak has achieved a 41% reduction, and Swiss Re has cut flying-related emissions by 67%. These companies are showing that significant reductions are possible without compromising business performance.
Despite the success stories, 44% of companies in the Travel Smart Ranking still have no specific targets related to business travel. That includes 25 of the world’s top corporate flyers—such as Google and Apple—who have not taken measurable steps to cut their aviation footprint. Combined, these 25 companies emit 6.9 million metric tons of CO2 annually from business travel alone. That’s equivalent to 48,000 transatlantic flights from Paris to New York or 1.3 times the yearly aviation emissions of Belgium.
Private jet use is another troubling trend. At least 19 of these top flyers—or their CEOs—own or regularly charter private aircraft. This includes companies like Meta and Johnson & Johnson, whose executives continue to fly privately despite growing scrutiny over corporate sustainability commitments.
According to the ranking, setting specific air travel targets leads to deeper cuts. Companies that established goals specifically focused on air travel achieved a 48% reduction in emissions. Those with more general travel-related goals reduced emissions by 41%, while companies with only broad sustainability targets managed a 35% cut. Companies with no targets at all saw the smallest reduction—just 28% on average.
This year, several companies improved their performance in the Travel Smart Ranking. Consulting firms like SGS and Arthur D. Little introduced new targets, while LTI Mindtree, Roland Berger, and McKinsey upgraded existing ones. Five more companies began reporting full climate impacts from their flying activities, including non-CO2 effects, marking a step toward more comprehensive climate accountability.
The Travel Smart Ranking, now in its fourth edition, rates companies from A to D based on 11 indicators, including emissions data, reduction targets, and reporting transparency. In this edition, only 21 companies achieved an A grade. Meanwhile, 242 received a C, and 28 scored a D. These ratings are based on 2023 emissions and the latest available target data, mostly from 2023 and some from 2024.
Experts behind the campaign emphasize that corporate air travel is one of the fastest ways to curb emissions in the aviation sector. While commercial aviation emissions are now 1% higher than in 2019, passenger aircraft emissions remain slightly below pre-pandemic levels. Without the reductions in business flying, overall aviation emissions would be significantly worse.
Corporate travel has long been seen as a necessary part of doing business. But the shift toward purposeful travel shows that flying less doesn’t have to mean doing less. As more companies implement concrete targets and explore sustainable alternatives, the path forward is clear. The laggards, including Merck, Bosch, and JPMorgan Chase, are now under pressure to align their practices with the growing demand for climate responsibility.
Should major corporations be required to report and reduce their business travel emissions? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
