Sustainability Community

S1 and S2 are very much focused on the financial impacts and reporting those impacts.  While the guidance seems to encourage consideration of impact on people and planet it is focused on impact of planet on the company rather than pushing for double materiality which the European standards seem to embrace.  

The link below is to the ECGI blog that brings up the questionof "Should the industry push for double materiality be included as different sets of standards consolidate.  What do you think?

Also how should non climate impacts be disclosed these are much more complex to measure meaningfully and as single materiality is a challenge double materiality accross all sustainability issues may be difficult to meaningfully regulate. 

Policy Watch: ISSB Standards

I also agree with the concerns but I think this is a major step towards global standardisation of sustainability disclosures for the capital markets. The fincancial reporting standards also came a long way and they continue to be enhanced to address gaps. And I believe sustainability reporting standards will also follow a similar course. So with this I think we are on the right trajectory. I also believe that IFRS has the benefit of using its existing capabilities to help develop these standards more efficiently for use globally.

Thank you David and Confidence.

Today I came across this resource related to this topic - these are slides from the webinar organised by IFRS on sustainability disclosure taxonomy.

The Proposed Taxonomy is open for comment until 26 September 2023. 

To view the way IFRS asks for comments and what questions are included see here

Attachment(s)

proposed-issb-taxonomy-webinar.pdf   786 KB 1 version