Rethinking environmental and sustainability consulting

Becky McLean, director of sustainability here at Civic, explores why there is no longer a divide when it comes to sustainability roles:

For any business it is important to have a clear service offering, to help clients understand what you can do for them but also help colleagues understand what they are selling. 

But when it comes to environmental and sustainability consulting, those service lines start to blur - that’s not necessarily a bad thing but it can be confusing. Who does what and when, and I get asked regularly what the difference is or how it all fits together.  I have been pondering this and have come to the conclusions that in fact, the belief that these are two completely different professions might be holding us all back.

The traditional divide

Environmental consultants are often seen as the experts in measuring, tracking, and mitigating environmental problems. Think Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEA), ecology, noise, air quality, land and water, pollution monitoring, and regulatory compliance. These professionals are grounded in the physical sciences, technical assessments, and environmental legislation.

On the other side, sustainability consultants are associated with the ‘triple bottom line’ - environmental, social, and economic impact. Their focus might include carbon assessments, ESG reporting, CSRD, climate risk, adaptation and resilience, circular economy, net zero strategies, employee training, and green building certifications like BREEAM or LEED.

Simple right?

But is that really the whole picture?

These definitions might seem tidy on paper, but in practice, they are increasingly overlapping. More importantly, seeing them as separate silos misses the interconnected nature of today’s challenges—and limits the value we can bring to projects and clients.

Take EIA, for example. It’s arguably the original system-thinking framework, where coordinators pull together diverse technical disciplines to assess the broader implications of a project. Over the last decade, EIA has evolved to cover far more than just environmental risk. It now includes climate change, materials, and waste (circular economy), human health, and social impacts—all topics that would traditionally fall under “sustainability.”  Typically, as it is required as part of the planning process, it also must consider policy, engagement, and consultation. 

In my experience as a lead EIA co-ordinator, we are also often the specialists advising on sustainability enhancements during the design process, drawing from multiple disciplines to influence better decisions. In many cases, they are acting as sustainability consultants in all but name. And frankly, an EIA that does not consider sustainability as part of the design process is no longer fit for purpose.

Meanwhile, specialists from other angles—MEP engineers, carbon consultants, circular economy strategists, resilience advisors—are shaping project outcomes in equally critical ways. Their technical knowledge is essential not just for reducing impact, but for futureproofing outcomes.

So what? Why does this matter and why did I bother writing this? 

Because, and I passionately believe this, dividing these roles holds us back.

Clients, collaborators, and project teams don’t care who “owns” sustainability. Everyone (should) care about outcomes. How to design better, deliver more resilient and compliant projects, and create long-term value for everyone. If we maintain artificial boundaries between environmental and sustainability professionals, we miss opportunities for integration, creativity, and systemic solutions.

When we embrace the overlap—and support professionals who straddle both areas—we unlock a more powerful way of working.

The way forward?

To deliver the best outcomes for projects, clients, and the communities they serve, we need:

• Every team member to see sustainability as part of their role.
• Environmental and sustainability professionals to collaborate more closely—or be the same person.
• A shift away from narrow labels, and toward systems thinking.

In my experience, the most effective consultants aren’t defined by one title or the other. They’re the ones who think across boundaries—connecting disciplines, asking the right questions, and keeping the bigger picture in view.

Environmental and sustainability consulting don’t belong in separate boxes. The challenges we face are complex, and the best solutions come when we blur the lines, share expertise, and work as one team.

For clients, this means more integrated advice and smarter outcomes.

For consultants, it means greater scope to lead and influence.

And for all of us, it’s a clear message: sustainability isn’t a specialist’s job—it’s everyone’s responsibility.

So next time you're building a team for a project, ask not just “What’s their title?”—but “Can they think in systems?” The best results come from those who see the bigger picture.