DOCSLIB.ORG

PROPOSALS for a RELEVANT and DYNAMIC EU SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING STANDARD- SETTING February 2021 © 2021 European Financial Reporting Advisory Group

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

FINAL REPORT PROPOSALS FOR A RELEVANT AND DYNAMIC EU SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING STANDARD- SETTING February 2021 © 2021 European Financial Reporting Advisory Group. DISCLAIMER This report and its appendices, published as a series of seven documents, were prepared by the European Lab Project Task Force on preparatory work for the elaboration of possible EU non-financial reporting standards (PTF-NFRS), for submission to the European Commission in response to a mandate including a request for technical advice dated 25 June 2020. The contents of the PTF-NFRS report and its appendices are the sole responsibility of the PTF-NFRS. The European Lab Steering Group Chair has assessed that appropriate quality control and due process had been observed to the extent possible within the context of the relevant mandate and the timeframe allowed, and has approved the publication of the PTF-NFRS report and its appendices. The PTF-NFRS report and its appendices do not represent the official views of EFRAG and are not subject to approval by the EFRAG governance bodies: EFRAG General Assembly and the EFRAG Board; or the European Lab Steering Group. As regards the views expressed in the PTF-NFRS report and its appendices the following observations and clarifications should be noted: • the PTF-NFRS report taken as a whole reflects a very large consensus; • it is understood that members of the PTF-NFRS are not expected to endorse each and every one of the 54 detailed proposals in the PTF-NFRS report and may have different views on some of them; • in addition the views expressed may not reflect the views of the organisations or entities to which individual PTF-NFRS members may belong; • the assessment work for the different project focus areas, presented in Appendices 4.1 to 4.6 to the PTF-NFRS report, was the result of separate sub-groups of the PTF-NFRS, for which only peer review within the PTF-NFRS was performed. Links are included in the PTF-NFRS report and its appendices to facilitate readers accessing the reference or source material mentioned. All such links were active and functioning at the time of publication. Questions about the European Lab and its projects can be submitted to [email protected]. 2 Commissioner McGuinness Financial Services, Financial Stability and Capital Markets Union Rue de la Loi, 200 B-1049 Brussels [email protected] Brussels, 28 February 2021 Dear Commissioner McGuinness, We are writing to you in our respective capacities as EFRAG Board President and Chairman of its European Lab Steering Group and as Chair of the Project Task Force on preparatory work for the elaboration of EU non-financial reporting standards (the ‘Task Force’). Please note that the Chair of the Task Force is acting on behalf of all Task Force members. In accordance with the mandate sent on 25 June 2020 by Executive Vice-President Dombrovskis, we attach the Report prepared to reflect the work accomplished by the Task Force over five months. This Report is the outcome of the collective and intensive work of the Task Force which has required constant dedication and commitment from its 35 members and nine representatives as well as from its seconded support staff (representing in total the contribution of 30 to 40 highly qualified individuals full time over the period). The Report taken as a whole reflects a very large consensus even if it is understood that members of the Task Force are not expected to endorse each and every one of the 54 detailed proposals and may have different views on some of them. Consensus building was challenging under the circumstances since it was not possible to hold physical meetings. However, it followed a careful process including successive online voting procedures on proposals, discussions in plenary meetings (13 in total), submission of drafts for comments, and preparation of an amended final draft submitted for final approval on 19 February. To prepare the Report the Task Force also carefully considered the feedback received from the seven outreach events EFRAG organised mid-January across the EU (on the basis of an outreach document released early January). More than 100 panelists and 3000 participants from all EU horizons had indeed the possibility to express their views on the key questions in the scope of the Task Force’s work. In summary we wish to highlight the Task Force key conclusions: • The EU has a unique sustainable development and sustainability reporting landscape which constitutes strong foundations for standard-setting. • Standard-setting should be built on robust EU conceptual guidelines, addressing public good alignment, expected qualitative characteristics of information, relevant time-horizons, clear boundaries, double materiality and connectivity between financial and sustainability reporting. • The overall target architecture of standards should be coherent and comprehensive and reflect appropriate layers of reporting (sector-agnostic, sector-specific and entity-specific), relevant reporting areas and a coverage of sustainabilty topics classified under an ESG+ categorisation. Presentation should preferably be organised under ‘sustainability statements’ and digitisation should be considered from the start. • The standard-setting roadmap towards the target architecture should be implemented in realistic phases. However, the first-time application of the revised EU Non-Financial Reporting Directive should benefit from a robust first set of ‘core’ standards. • Finally, there is significant merit in promoting a mutually reinforcing cooperation between EU standard-setting efforts and international initiatives or fora. 3 The Task Force wishes to further highlight that meeting the technical challenges of EU sustainability reporting standard-setting has implications in terms of governance and resources which are not in the Task Force’s remit, but which are critical success- factors. We remain at your disposal and at the disposal of DG FISMA to answer any questions and receive comments that you may have. We would welcome the opportunity to present the Report to you in more detail. Yours sincerely, Jean-Paul Gauzès Patrick de Cambourg EFRAG Board President and Chair of the Task Force and Chairman of the European Lab Steering Group Chair of Autorité des normes comptables Copy: Executive Vice-President Dombrovskis Sean Berrigan, Director-General, DG FISMA Ugo Bassi, Director Financial Markets, DG FISMA Alain Deckers, Head of unit Corporate reporting, Audit and Credit rating agencies, DG FISMA 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY February 2021 This Executive Summary highlights the main recommendations (54 proposals) of EFRAG’s Project Task Force on preparatory work for the elaboration of possible EU non-financial reporting standards (PTF). The detailed Report taken as a whole reflects a large consensus. However, it is important to note that PTF members are not expected to endorse every recommendation or view entailed in this Report and each has the right to take a different view on some of the views expressed. These recommendations are made in a context where the content of the revised Non-Financial Directive (NFRD) is not finalised. These recommendations do not constitute a first attempt at standard-setting. Their objective is to describe the scope and structure of future sustainability reporting standards that contribute to the achievement of the EU’s policy objectives, not to set out specific disclosure requirements, indicators or metrics. The latter is a task for the EU’s future standards-setter. 1 The revision of the NFRD is essential to meet the needs of users for relevant, comparable and accessible information. Sustainability reporting must therefore rapidly improve to progress alongside the equally rapidly developing EU policies in the context of the EU Green Deal, including sustainable finance. Most of these policies require more robust data about the risks that companies face in relation to sustainability matters and about their impacts on society and the environment. 2 The EU has taken a leadership position in relation to sustainable development and sustainable finance policies. International fora such as the G20, the Financial Stability Board and the International Platform on Sustainable Finance as well as important jurisdictions such as the United States, are taking an increasing interest in this policy area, including sustainability disclosures/reporting. However, the PTF considers that international initiatives cannot in the short term match the speed and scope of EU’s level of ambition. The EU’s next steps should be implemented in a spirit of cooperation and partnership with international initiatives and partners in order to converge efforts but should not slow down the momentum achieved in the EU. Nor should it undermine the level of ambition (in terms of both speed and scope) that the EU has demonstrated, for example in the European Green Deal and the EU’s climate strategy. 3 The purpose of publicly available sustainability reporting is to provide relevant, faithful, comparable and reliable information: a) about (i) material sustainability impacts of the reporting entity on affected stakeholders (including the environment) and (ii) material sustainability risks and opportunities for its own value creation; b) enabling users of information (i) to understand the reporting entity’s sustainability objectives, position and performance and (ii) to inform their decisions relating to their engagement with the entity. 4 Sustainability reporting should be directly connected to management reporting
Recommended publications
  • Towards Better Embedding Sustainability Into Companies&#X2019

    Towards Better Embedding Sustainability Into Companies’

    Journal of Cleaner Production 25 (2012) 14e26 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Journal of Cleaner Production journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro Towards better embedding sustainability into companies’ systems: an analysis of voluntary corporate initiatives Rodrigo Lozano* Sustainability Research Institute, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK article info abstract Article history: Corporate leaders and employees have been increasingly recognising their role in contributing to Received 12 November 2010 sustainability. In this context, different voluntary tools, approaches, and initiatives have been developed Received in revised form by and for corporations to engage with sustainability. However, there has been a lack of clarity in 1 November 2011 explaining how the initiatives address the different elements of the company system (operations and Accepted 20 November 2011 processes, management and strategy, organisational systems, procurement and marketing, and assess- Available online 9 December 2011 ment and communication), how they contribute to sustainability’s dimensions (economic, environ- mental, social, and time), how they are linked, or combined to help leaders better embed sustainability Keywords: ’ Corporations into their company s system. The paper provides an analysis of sixteen of the most widely used initiatives Sustainability (e.g. life cycle assessment, eco-design, cleaner production, corporate social responsibility, and sustain- Voluntary initiatives ability reporting). Each initiative was analysed on how it contributes or addresses the four dimensions of Company system sustainability, and the company system. It was found that each initiative has advantages with respect to Operations scope and focus for the sustainability dimensions and the company system’s elements, but it has certain Management disadvantages when it comes to dealing with the complexity and broadness of sustainability.
  • Impact Assessment

    Impact Assessment

    Title: Impact Assessment (IA) Sustainability criteria for biomass and bioliquids in the Renewables Obligation URN: 10D/761 Date: Lead department or agency: 16/07/2010 DECC Stage: Development/Options Other departments or agencies: Source of intervention: Domestic DfT Type of measure: Primary legislation Contact for enquiries: Ewa Kmietowicz Summary: Intervention and Options What is the problem under consideration? Why is government intervention necessary? Biomass is plant or animal matter of recent origin. It includes such materials as wood, food waste, manures, miscanthus grass, wheat and rapeseed oil. Biomass can be used to generate heat and electricity, or to produce transport fuel. GHG savings from the use of biomass only accrue if the material is replaced through replanting. As demand for woodfuel increases, there is the risk that biomass could be harvested by simply clearing large areas of tropical rainforest. The resulting land use change would deliver a large increase in greenhouse gas emissions, as well as destruction of a rare, highly biodiverse habitat. It could also spark damaging headlines impacting the credibility and confidence of the bioenergy industry. There are therefore important sustainability concerns to be addressed. What are the policy objectives and the intended effects? The policy objectives are four-fold. The introduction of sustainability criteria would - ensure that growth in bioenergy also delivers on the UK’s wider carbon and energy security ambitions, - reduce uncertainty to encourage investment in new UK generation and biomass feedstoc supplies, - promote good practice on sustainable feedstock sourcing and drive underperformers to improve, and - help secure the support of local government & public to proposed new bioenergy developments.
  • Five Steps to Good Sustainability Reporting a Practical Guide for Companies

    Five Steps to Good Sustainability Reporting a Practical Guide for Companies

    Five Steps to Good Sustainability Reporting A Practical Guide for Companies Five Steps to Good Sustainability Reporting 1 Five Steps to Good Sustainability Reporting A Practical Guide for Companies NOVEMBER 2020 ABOUT THIS REPORT The report is based on BSR’s long experience working on sustainability reporting with companies, a literature review, and interviews with member companies. Any errors are those of the authors. Please direct comments or questions to [email protected]. This report was researched and written by Nina Hatch and Adam Fishman, with input from Dunstan Allison-Hope. The authors wish to thank the companies featured in case studies for sharing their perspectives and for participating in this exercise. DISCLAIMER BSR publishes occasional papers as a contribution to the understanding of the role of business in society and the trends related to corporate social responsibility (CSR) and responsible business practices. BSR maintains a policy of not acting as a representative of its membership, nor does it endorse specific policies or standards. The views expressed in this publication are those of its authors and do not reflect those of BSR members. Five Steps to Good Sustainability Reporting 2 Contents Introduction 4 Step 1: Set Priorities and Develop Strategy 7 1.1 Materiality: Conduct/Review 8 1.2 Set Strategy, Pillars, Ambition, and Goals 11 1.3 Benchmark: What Are Peers Doing 14 Step 2: Build the Structure and Gather Data 15 2.1 Identify Key Audiences for The Report 16 2.2 Assess Gaps against Standards and Frameworks 18 2.3
  • REPORTING on the Sdgs an Action Platform to Accelerate Corporate Reporting on the Global Goals

    REPORTING on the Sdgs an Action Platform to Accelerate Corporate Reporting on the Global Goals

    REPORTING ON THE SDGs An Action Platform to accelerate corporate reporting on the Global Goals We are at a key moment in the evolution of sustainability; transparency is fast becoming the new paradigm for conducting business. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have ushered in a new era of global development objectives, aimed at addressing the world’s most pressing problems. The active participation of business is a principle driver in achieving these goals but best practice for corporate reporting on the SDGs has yet to be established. The UN Global Compact, the world’s largest corporate sustainability initiative, and GRI, the world’s leading organization for sustainability reporting, have formed a ground-breaking action platform to tackle this challenge. Reporting on the SDGs will complement GRI Standards and the UN Global Compact Communication on Progress, and enable business reporting on the SDGs. There is growing recognition of the value of corporate non-financial reporting. The Action Platform will leverage the GRI Standards – the world’s most widely used sustainability reporting standards – and the Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact to help businesses incorporate SDG reporting into their existing processes. This will empower corporate action that can make the achievements of the SDGs a reality. The members of the Action Platform will work to increase the value of corporate sustainability disclosures for other stakeholder groups, including members of the financial community as well as governments and policy makers. GRI and the UN Global Compact will also facilitate SDG-reporting by small and medium-size enterprises, as they represent around 90% of global economic activity.
  • Determinants of Sustainability Reporting in the Present Institutional Context: the Case of Seaport Authorities Geerts Magali1*, Dooms Michaël1 and Stas Lara1

    Determinants of Sustainability Reporting in the Present Institutional Context: the Case of Seaport Authorities Geerts Magali1*, Dooms Michaël1 and Stas Lara1

    IAME 2020 CONFERENCE | HONG KONG Paper ID 105 Determinants of sustainability reporting in the present institutional context: the case of seaport authorities Geerts Magali1*, Dooms Michaël1 and Stas Lara1 1Vrije Universiteit Brussel * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract Research on the practice oF sustainability reporting speciFically Focused on the approach applied by port authorities (or port managing bodies – PMB) and based on surveys as a data collection method is very limited. Most research consists of single case studies, only covers in part the different dimensions related to the implementation of sustainability reporting or are based on content analysis. This chapter ofFers a multidimensional approach of the concept of sustainability reporting based on a global survey yielding 97 complete and valid answers of PMBs. A binomial logistic regression has been conducted to identify those internal determinants (organizational characteristics) that have the largest explanatory power when it comes to the adoption of the practice of sustainability reporting. The research results identify new internal variables compared to the results of previous studies, such as the proximity to a city, the history of data gathering and the presence of environmental/social certiFications. Furthermore, the chapter also investigates how these organizational characteristics are interlinked with external, contextual Forces by making use of the institutional theory. By combining organizational characteristics with information of the institutional environment in which the PMB operates, a more complete image is obtained. The results of this analysis show that all different institutional pressures are in play when it comes to having influence on the decision-making oF PMBs with regard to the adoption of sustainability reporting.
  • Sustainability Reporting Priorities – a Study Exploring Accounting Majors’ Perceptions

    Sustainability Reporting Priorities – a Study Exploring Accounting Majors’ Perceptions

    Global Journal of Accounting and Finance Volume 1, Number 2, 2017 SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING PRIORITIES – A STUDY EXPLORING ACCOUNTING MAJORS’ PERCEPTIONS Marianne L. James, California State University, Los Angeles ABSTRACT Sustainability reporting continues to gain global significance. Diverse stakeholders expect that entities of all types and sizes behave responsiblyand add value while minimizing their negative impact on scarce resources. Increasingly, stakeholders also expect that entities report information about their comprehensive effect on the environment, employees, the community, and other stakeholders. Accounting professionals’ involvement with the selection, derivation, and reporting of sustainability related information is expanding and presents significant opportunities for current and future accounting professionals. Accounting professionals’ perceptions regarding sustainability reporting may influence the nature and extent of reporting; hence, their perceptions are important. This study investigates the perceptions of accounting majors regarding broad aswell as specific aspects of sustainability reporting by business entities. The study finds thataccounting majors tend to support sustainability reporting by public companies, perceive that entities should report information about failures as well as achievements, and that the information should be audited. In response to openended- queries, accountingmajors specified several typesof information with high reporting priority for each major sustainability area - environment, labor,
  • Gri 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016

    Gri 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016

    GRI 414: SUPPLIER SOCIAL ASSESSMENT 2016 GRI 414 Contents Introduction 3 GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 5 1. Management approach disclosures 5 2. Topic-specific disclosures 7 Disclosure 414-1 New suppliers that were screened using social criteria 7 Disclosure 414-2 Negative social impacts in the supply chain and actions taken 8 Glossary 9 References 11 About this Standard Responsibility This Standard is issued by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB). Any feedback on the GRI Standards can be submitted to [email protected] for the consideration of the GSSB. Scope GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment sets out reporting requirements on the topic of supplier social assessment. This Standard can be used by an organization of any size, type, sector or geographic location that wants to report on its impacts related to this topic. Normative This Standard is to be used together with the most recent versions of the following references documents. GRI 101: Foundation GRI 103: Management Approach GRI Standards Glossary In the text of this Standard, terms defined in the Glossary are underlined. Effective date This Standard is effective for reports or other materials published on or after 1 July 2018. Earlier adoption is encouraged. Note: This document includes hyperlinks to other Standards. In most browsers, using ‘ctrl’ + click will open external links in a new browser window. After clicking on a link, use ‘alt’ + left arrow to return to the previous view. 2 GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016 Introduction A. Overview An organization then selects from the set of topic- specific GRI Standards for reporting on its material This Standard is part of the set of GRI Sustainability topics.
  • SDG Compass Guide for Business Action on the Sdgs

    SDG Compass Guide for Business Action on the Sdgs

    The guide for business action on the SDGs Developed by: TM Our planet faces massive economic, social and environmental challenges. To combat these, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) define global priorities and aspirations for 2030. They represent an unprecedented opportunity to eliminate extreme poverty and put the world on a sustainable path. Governments worldwide have already agreed to these goals. Now it is time for business to take action. The SDG Compass explains how the SDGs affect your business – offering you the tools and knowledge to put sustainability at the heart of your strategy. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) What’s inside? Page Executive Why do the SDGs matter for business? 4 summary What is the SDG Compass? 5 Step 01 6 Understanding What are the SDGs? 7 the SDGs Understanding the business case 8 The baseline responsibilities for business 10 Step 02 11 Defining Map the value chain to identify impact areas 12 Select indicators and collect data 14 priorities Define priorities 15 Step 03 16 Setting Define scope of goals and select KPIs 17 Define baseline and select goal type 18 goals Set level of ambition 18 Announce commitment to SDGs 20 Step 04 21 Anchoring sustainability goals Integrating within the business 22 Embed sustainability across all functions 23 Engage in partnerships 24 Step 05 25 Reporting and Effective reporting and communication 27 Communicating on SDG performance 28 communicating SDG Compass www.sdgcompass.org 3 Executive summary Why do the SDGs matter for business? The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Covering a wide spectrum of sustainable development define global sustainable development priorities topics relevant to companies – such as poverty, and aspirations for 2030 and seek to mobilize health, education, climate change and environmental global efforts around a common set of goals degradation – the SDGs can help to connect business and targets.
  • Sustainability Reporting Trends: Get Ready for 2021

    Sustainability Reporting Trends: Get Ready for 2021

    GET READY FOR 2021 WITH OUR LATEST Sustainability Reporting Trends AND BEST PRACTICES FRAMEWORKS STORYTELLING SMART REPORTING COVID-19 The latest on established Sustainability takes See how top reporters We look at how companies and emerging frameworks – centre stage with are targeting the right are managing to address from SASB to the TCFD. influencers, experiential audiences with the right one of today’s most marketing and more. information in new ways. complex issues. THIS REPORT IS FOR YOU The reporting landscape is always changing. We know that you don’t always have the time to stay on top of it – but we do. We love it, we live it, and in this summary we have identified what you need to know as you build your reporting program for 2021. 9 265+ 10 5 YEARS OF DATA POINTS SECTORS CONTINENTS TRENDS RESEARCH ANALYZED RESEARCHED ASSESSED SEVEN CORE RESEARCH TOPICS LEADERSHIP WHAT MATTERS STORYTELLING SMART AND STRATEGY MOST REPORTING DIGITAL FRAMEWORKS PERFORMANCE STRATEGIES ABOUT OUR METHODOLOGY IN FULL TRANSPARENCY Our team reviews primary sustainability publications (including Our primary goal is to identify and highlight the very best integrated reports) along with supporting materials. These practices. Consequently, we highlight reports we did not include financial disclosures, summary reports and ESG data design. It is not our intention to take credit for the work of tables. We also review sustainability-focused content available on others; rather, we seek to draw attention to excellence on the each company’s corporate website and how companies promote part of reporting companies (and their suppliers, when that sustainability on social media channels – which occasionally applies).
  • Measuring Up* Sustainability Reporting in the Forest, Paper & Packaging Industry

    Measuring Up* Sustainability Reporting in the Forest, Paper & Packaging Industry

    Forest Paper & Packaging Sustainable Business Solutions Measuring up* Sustainability Reporting in the Forest, Paper & Packaging Industry © 2007 PricewaterhouseCoopers Sustainability Reporting in the Forest, Paper & Packaging Industry PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) has been providing Sustainable Business Solutions to the forest, paper and packaging industry for over twenty years, during which time the issue of sustainability has gone from the peripheries of the corporate mindset to centre stage. Reporting on environmental, social and economic sustainability performance is a relatively new phenomenon that has attracted significant attention in recent years. For an industry like forest, paper and packaging that has often been the focus of negative media attention and public scrutiny for its environmental performance, sustainability reporting would seem to offer an ideal opportunity to improve transparency and demonstrate the industry’s commitment to the broader suite of sustainability issues – but has this happened? PwC undertook a high- level review of the sustainability reporting practices of the PwC Top 100 to assess the current status. Findings Reporting on Environmental Of the PwC Top 100, 61 companies have produced some kind of Sustainability Indicators sustainability report. Environmental sustainability indicators examine company impacts on the natural environment as well as describing environmentally Scope of Reporting Detail friendly operational practices. Environmental indicators were more likely to be reported than either social or economic Most forest, paper and packaging sustainability reports are indicators, with air emissions and energy consumption as the published annually. 79% of companies provide corporate-level most commonly reported metrics, provided by 85% and 82% detail on their sustainability activities, where only 39% provide of reporters respectively.
  • 2019 Sustainability Report Update Summary 2019 SUSTAINABILITY REPORT UPDATE › CEO MESSAGE

    2019 Sustainability Report Update Summary 2019 SUSTAINABILITY REPORT UPDATE › CEO MESSAGE

    DRIVING CHANGE 2019 Sustainability Report Update Summary 2019 SUSTAINABILITY REPORT UPDATE › CEO MESSAGE LOOKING BACK AND PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE Jim Fish President and Chief Executive Officer Waste Management prepared our first “Environmental Report” in 1992. This was well before we used the term “sustainability,” and before we regularly reported on environmental, social and governance (ESG) principles. We were part of a small group of Fortune 500 companies embarking upon the early days of a commitment to the underlying principles of sustainability. Little did we know where this journey would take us. Today, our stakeholders value our extensive and informative annual reporting. Waste Management’s full sustainability report is published bi-annually, with updates on the off-year. These updates include the data that we collect each year to track our key performance indicators and our progress towards achieving our goals. Reporting is one step in our commitment to sustainability. Establishing long-term goals was another important step along our sustainability journey. Waste Management developed its first set of sustainability goals in 2007, well ahead of most companies. We recently updated our goals and we expect to do so again as our industry and our company continue to evolve. Over the years, Waste Management has continued to increase our commitment to sustainability. Since 2008, we’ve employed a team of internal staff dedicated to working with our customers to help them achieve their sustainability goals. And, at the end of 2018, we created a sustainability team dedicated to tracking and reporting our progress, advocating on sustainability issues, and to supporting our business units by providing sustainability-related information for internal and external stakeholders.
  • How to Report on the Sdgs: What Good Looks Like and Why It Matters

    How to Report on the Sdgs: What Good Looks Like and Why It Matters

    EDGE OF PAGE EDGE OF PAGE MARGIN MARGIN CROP MARKS CROP MARGIN MARGIN CROP MARKS CROP How to report on the SDGs What good looks like and why it matters February 2018 kpmg.com/sdgreporting CROP MARKS CROP MARGIN © 2018 KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”). KPMG International provides no client services and is a Swiss entity with which the independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated. kpmg.com/sdgreporting | 0 All rights reserved. MARGIN CROP MARKS CROP MARGIN MARGIN EDGE OF PAGE EDGE OF PAGE EDGE OF PAGE EDGE OF PAGE MARGIN MARGIN CROP MARKS CROP MARGIN MARGIN CROP MARKS CROP Contents What this study is about and who it is for 2 Lead authors What does good SDG reporting look like? 3 Executive summary 6 José Luis Blasco Understanding the SDGs Global Head of KPMG Sustainability Services José Luis heads the Sustainability Services practice at KPMG in Spain as well Key findings 8 as leading KPMG’s global Sustainability Services network. José Luis advises What does good look like? 10 major companies on incorporating the risks and opportunities of environmental and social megatrends into their corporate strategies. Recommendations for readers 12 Prioritizing the SDGs Key findings 13 Adrian King What does good look like? 16 KPMG Global Lead for Sustainability Reporting & Assurance Services Recommendations for readers 20 Adrian is the Partner in Charge of the Sustainability Services practice at KPMG in Australia. He has more than 25 years’ experience working with global public Measuring the SDGs and private companies to provide financial and non-financial advisory, reporting Key findings 21 and assurance services.