Environmental sustainability has become an increasingly critical focus across all industries, and the pharmaceutical and healthcare sector is no exception. As global health systems expand and demand for medical treatments grows, so too does the environmental footprint of drug manufacturing, packaging, distribution, and healthcare delivery.

Moreover, regulatory bodies, investors, and consumers are increasingly demanding transparency and action around sustainability. Initiatives like the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) frameworks are prompting pharmaceutical and healthcare companies to demonstrate their environmental stewardship. Effective tracking allows for evidence-based reporting and supports compliance with evolving global standards.

In an interview with the Drug and Device World, Hanns-Christian Mahler, CEO of Swiss Contract Development and Manufacturing Organization (CDMO) ten23 health, talks about the importance of incorporating environmentally sustainable practices. He also discusses the challenges in sustainability reporting and notes the progress his company has made in this area.

Read our analysis of ten23’s environmental sustainability

The interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Phalguni Deswal (PD): Sustainability reporting often focuses on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions because it’s the most visible metric. In the early stages, companies can make big reductions—40% or 50% even—but as time goes on, those gains get harder. How do you balance further improvement with business growth?

Hanns-Christian Mahler (HM): That’s the core challenge. Growth means more assets, more people, more energy. That’s why we [ten23] early on introduced metrics like energy intensity per person or per region. It helps balance growth while keeping emissions in check.

 You’re right about the quick wins. Initial gains are often low-hanging fruit—like switching to renewable energy. Personally, it took me just a week to switch our household to 100% green energy. It shouldn’t take companies much longer.

Still, some changes take time. For example, in Basel we’re dependent on an energy provider that still uses fossil fuels. We’re working on changing that, but it wasn’t possible in year one. The key is to go after low-hanging fruit quickly, then keep pushing forward on more complex projects that may take years—and may require external collaboration.

You can’t give up after year one. You just shift focus. Start with what you can directly control.

The trick is to start with what’s in your control. Many companies delay action by fixating on scope 3 emissions, claiming they’re too complex. I believe this shouldn’t be a barrier—start with what you can directly influence. Turn off the office heating if no one’s there. Consider unconventional ideas, too—I once heard of temperature-adjustable clothing to reduce the need for heating entire buildings. Every little bit adds up.

PD: One recurring issue I’ve noticed in ESG reports is inconsistent data. Numbers don’t match, charts differ from the text, and sometimes even the definition of “Net zero” is misleading. Do you think this confusion stems from poor standardization, lack of expertise, or is sustainability just not a high priority for some companies?

HM: I’d say all three. Definitions vary from company to company. In some cases, sustainability isn’t prioritized internally, so when teams request data, they’re told it’s not available—or worse, not important. Imagine telling your CFO that you can’t provide financial data. That would be unacceptable. But with sustainability, that lack of accountability is still too common. Sustainability leaders often lack organizational support to do their jobs properly.

That said, the field is evolving. There are more experts, and younger generations are demanding better standards. Still, reporting frameworks remain overly complex, and while I’m optimistic about the standardization brought by legislation like CSRD, I was disappointed to see the recent EU efforts watered down.

That’s why regulation matters. I believe in people’s desire to do good—but also in the power of legislation. Transparency matters and standardization helps make things comparable. Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) reporting standards are a good step. I was disappointed by recent EU decisions that lowered compliance thresholds. Still, it’s encouraging that some companies continue reporting voluntarily.

Once a company makes a public commitment—say, to reach net zero by 2050—it creates accountability. If you change your targets midway, stakeholders will notice. I’ve already seen companies push 2030 goals to 2040 or beyond. That raises serious governance questions.

PD: And with Scope 3 emissions in particular, it often seems that companies cherry-pick what’s “relevant” and ignore large categories. How do you handle that?

HM: Scope 3 is tricky, and the data will never be perfect. But that’s no reason not to try. There’s a risk of double-counting between suppliers and clients, sure—but that’s better than missing emissions entirely.

We divide Scope 3 into operational and non-operational categories. Operational includes things like employee commuting and business travel. These are measurable, and we take steps to influence behavior. For example, we provide public transit vouchers, bike subsidies, but no car benefits. We even track how employees commute via our HR system. That gives us real data, not assumptions.

Non-operational Scope 3 includes purchased goods, capital goods, logistics—things further from our control. We still assess these with best-effort estimates, but we’re realistic. Some suppliers resist completing sustainability questionnaires, saying we’re too small or our forms are different. That’s where standardization will be crucial. Ideally, suppliers could publish standardized data for automated analysis.

We’re working with a company called Elio that uses artificial intelligence (AI) to scrape and synthesize public sustainability data and combine it with environmental databases to give us impact at both product and supplier level. That’s a more scalable solution than chasing every supplier individually. And allows us to have some direct control over ‘indirect’ emissions by preferentially purchasing more sustainable goods.

Read our analysis of ten23’s environmental sustainability

PD: One of the most compelling parts of ten23’s report was about plastic cleanups in the marine environment. You noted that your company removes twice as much plastic as it generates. How did that initiative come about?

HM: The idea started with a core belief: you can’t just clean up plastic and claim to be sustainable if you’re still contributing to the problem. So, from the outset, we focused on minimizing plastic use rather than relying on offsetting. The traditional model of paying to mitigate environmental harm without changing core behaviors doesn’t align with real sustainability.

This thinking dates back to our company’s founding. While carbon emissions are critical, they’re not the only metric. We wanted to approach sustainability from multiple angles, not just CO₂. For example, we questioned everything—even whether to allow printers in our office.

The partnership with Seven Clean Seas was inspired by a startup in Berlin called Einhorn, which produces sustainable hygiene products. They mentioned this initiative that removes plastic from oceans and coastlines, particularly in areas like Malaysia, Indonesia, and Singapore, where the problem is especially acute. It’s sobering to see the footage of their cleanups. I’m proud we support them—they even provide interactive maps showing where they collect waste and how much.

PD: Another thing that caught my attention was your cooling system upgrade. You mentioned a 60% reduction in water withdrawal in 2023, after implementing that system. Could you tell me more about that?

HM: I’m not an engineer, so I can’t explain the exact technical setup, but we are using large quantities of Rhine River water for cooling purposes. The core idea was to reduce resource consumption by being creative. It’s about analyzing major energy and water uses and finding innovative ways to address them.

For example, in a new non-human-use production line we launched in Basel, we repurposed an existing HVAC system from a previous tenant—essentially reusing infrastructure. But we also optimized how it runs, so it doesn’t operate 24/7, cutting down energy use significantly. That’s another way we aim to make smarter, leaner operations.

From the start, we wanted to go above and beyond. But we also know we can’t scale impact alone. If our customers, competitors, and employees are inspired to act, then we’re doing something right.

Sustainability can’t be an individual pursuit. It’s collective action. That’s why we invest in things like employee engagement—sharing ideas, hosting exchanges, and experiential activities. For instance, we took staff on a trip to a glacier in Switzerland. Seeing climate change firsthand creates a deeper emotional impact than just reviewing Excel spreadsheets. That’s how we create lasting change—by combining data with real human experience. We also have a culture of knowledge sharing and collaboration across the value chain and particularly with our ‘competitors’ – working together for the greater good.

Read our analysis of ten23’s environmental sustainability