GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 · Topic Standard · Cross-sectoral
Disclosure GRI 101-6
Direct drivers of biodiversity loss
Practical guidance for preparing this disclosure. Use this card to identify datapoints, verify claims and organise supporting evidence. For exact requirements, always refer to the official GRI source.
Open official GRI source
↗ Share
Reviewed by
Dr Ross Kurinko · GRI Certified Trainer
To prepare this disclosure
45 datapoints ↓
6 claims to verify ↓
5 evidence areas ↓
3 report examples ↓
Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to explain the main direct pressures its activities create on biodiversity. In practice, that means identifying the specific ways the organisation contributes to biodiversity loss, rather than speaking only in general terms about nature or sustainability. The focus is on the direct drivers linked to the organisation’s own operations and value chain where relevant, so the report should make clear what those pressures are and where they arise.
The practical emphasis is on coverage and completeness: the organisation should look across its activities, not just at a few flagship sites or the easiest examples to describe. A useful report will show whether the assessment covers the full business, which locations or activities are included, and where the most significant direct impacts are concentrated. The aim is to give readers a clear picture of the organisation’s main biodiversity-related pressures and the scope of what has been assessed.
* This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official GRI source.
Before you start
A quick mental checklist before you prepare this disclosure — tick each as you settle it.
Preparation
Key datapoints to prepare
| Datapoint | What to capture | Evidence hint | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Main biodiversity pressures | List the main direct pressures from the organisation’s activities that are driving biodiversity loss. | Evidence required | Sustainability / Environment |
| Main biodiversity pressures | List the main direct pressures from the organisation’s activities that are driving biodiversity loss. | Evidence required | Sustainability / Environment |
| Highest impact sites | Identify the sites where the organisation’s effects on biodiversity are greatest. | Evidence required | Operations / Environment |
| Land and sea conversion | Describe changes where land or sea has been changed from one use or condition to another. | Evidence required | Operations / Environment |
| Land and sea conversion | Describe changes where land or sea has been changed from one use or condition to another. | Evidence required | Operations / Environment |
| Converted natural area | Capture the area, in hectares, of natural ecosystem converted after the chosen cut-off or reference date. | Evidence required | Environment / Land Management |
| Reference date used | Record the cut-off or reference date used to decide what counts in the conversion total. | Evidence required | Environment / Land Management |
| Before conversion habitat | State the ecosystem type that existed before the natural area was converted. | Evidence required | Environment / Land Management |
| After conversion habitat | State the ecosystem type present after the natural area was converted. | Evidence required | Environment / Land Management |
| Converted natural area | Capture the area, in hectares, of natural ecosystem converted after the chosen cut-off or reference date. | Evidence required | Environment / Land Management |
| Reference date used | Record the cut-off or reference date used to decide what counts in the conversion total. | Evidence required | Environment / Land Management |
| Before conversion habitat | State the ecosystem type that existed before the natural area was converted. | Evidence required | Environment / Land Management |
| After conversion habitat | State the ecosystem type present after the natural area was converted. | Evidence required | Environment / Land Management |
| Modified ecosystem change | Report the hectares of land or sea changed from one heavily used or altered ecosystem to another during the reporting period. | Evidence required | Operations / Environment |
| Before conversion habitat | State the ecosystem type that existed before the heavily used or altered area was converted. | Evidence required | Operations / Environment |
| After conversion habitat | State the ecosystem type present after the heavily used or altered area was converted. | Evidence required | Operations / Environment |
| Modified ecosystem change | Report the hectares of land or sea changed from one heavily used or altered ecosystem to another during the reporting period. | Evidence required | Operations / Environment |
| Before conversion habitat | State the ecosystem type that existed before the heavily used or altered area was converted. | Evidence required | Operations / Environment |
| After conversion habitat | State the ecosystem type present after the heavily used or altered area was converted. | Evidence required | Operations / Environment |
| Resource use impacts | Describe the organisation’s use of natural resources that is relevant to biodiversity impacts. | Evidence required | Sustainability / Environment |
| Resource use impacts | Describe the organisation’s use of natural resources that is relevant to biodiversity impacts. | Evidence required | Sustainability / Environment |
| Wild species taken | List the kinds of wild species that are harvested. | Evidence required | Operations / Procurement |
| Wild species quantity | Capture the quantity of wild species harvested. | Evidence required | Operations / Procurement |
| Extinction risk level | State the extinction-risk level for the harvested wild species. | Evidence required | Sustainability / Environment |
| Wild species taken | List the kinds of wild species that are harvested. | Evidence required | Operations / Procurement |
| Wild species quantity | Capture the quantity of wild species harvested. | Evidence required | Operations / Procurement |
| Extinction risk level | State the extinction-risk level for the harvested wild species. | Evidence required | Sustainability / Environment |
| Water taken | Describe the organisation’s water withdrawal activity for the reporting period. | Evidence required | Operations / Utilities |
| Water used up | Describe the organisation’s water consumption activity for the reporting period. | Evidence required | Operations / Utilities |
| Water taken | Describe the organisation’s water withdrawal activity for the reporting period. | Evidence required | Operations / Utilities |
| Water used up | Describe the organisation’s water consumption activity for the reporting period. | Evidence required | Operations / Utilities |
| Pollution impacts | Describe the pollution-related impacts relevant to biodiversity. | Evidence required | Environment / Compliance |
| Pollutant type | Name the pollutant that is generated. | Evidence required | Environment / Compliance |
| Pollutant quantity | Capture the quantity of pollutant generated. | Evidence required | Environment / Compliance |
| Pollution impacts | Describe the pollution-related impacts relevant to biodiversity. | Evidence required | Environment / Compliance |
| Pollutant type | Name the pollutant that is generated. | Evidence required | Environment / Compliance |
| Pollutant quantity | Capture the quantity of pollutant generated. | Evidence required | Environment / Compliance |
| Introduced invasive species | Name any invasive alien species introduced by the organisation’s activities. | Evidence required | Environment / Biosecurity |
| Introduction pathway | Describe how the invasive species are, or could be, introduced. | Evidence required | Environment / Biosecurity |
| Introduced invasive species | Name any invasive alien species introduced by the organisation’s activities. | Evidence required | Environment / Biosecurity |
| Introduction pathway | Describe how the invasive species are, or could be, introduced. | Evidence required | Environment / Biosecurity |
| High-impact products | Identify the product or service in the supply chain that has the biggest biodiversity impact. | Evidence required | Procurement / Sustainability |
| Activity countries | List the countries or jurisdictions where the related product or service activities take place. | Evidence required | Procurement / Supply Chain |
| Other jurisdictions | Add any other countries or jurisdictions linked to the activity that are not already listed. | Evidence required | Procurement / Supply Chain |
| Compilation notes | Provide the context needed to understand how the data was put together, including the standards, methods and assumptions used. | Evidence required | Sustainability Reporting / Data Governance |
Show GRI 101-6 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
- State the methods, assumptions, and reporting rules used to compile the figures.
- Name the countries or territories where the product or service activity happens.
- Give the date used as the reporting cut-off or reference point.
- Explain how non-native invasive species are, or could be, brought in.
- Set out the main direct causes of biodiversity decline.
- Describe use of natural resources.
- Identify any invasive alien species that have been brought in.
- Describe changes in land or marine use.
- State the assessed level of extinction threat.
- Name any other countries or territories involved.
- Describe pollution as a pressure on biodiversity.
- Identify the product or service in the supply chain with the biggest biodiversity impact.
- State the amount of pollutant produced.
- State the amount of wild species taken from nature.
- Identify the sites with the biggest biodiversity impact.
- Give the area, in hectares, of land or sea changed from one heavily used or altered ecosystem to another during the reporting period.
- Give the area, in hectares, of natural ecosystem changed since the chosen cut-off or reference date.
- State the ecosystem type after changing a heavily used or altered ecosystem.
- State the ecosystem type after changing a natural ecosystem.
- State the ecosystem type before changing a heavily used or altered ecosystem.
- State the ecosystem type before changing a natural ecosystem.
- Name the type of pollutant produced.
- Name the types of wild species taken from nature.
- State water use.
- State water taken from sources.
LRA working checklist - paraphrased; see official source
How to prepare
- Set the reporting boundary first. Decide which operations, sites, products, services and supply-chain activities you will include, so the disclosure covers the parts of the business that matter for this topic.
- Agree what each data item means in your organisation. For every required point, fix the definitions you will use for the main impact drivers, the site list, land or sea conversion, resource use, pollution, invasive species, and the product or service areas linked to the biggest biodiversity impacts.
- Gather source records before drafting the disclosure. Pull together maps, land-use records, conversion logs, water and pollution data, species or habitat notes, supplier information, and any other files that support the figures or statements you plan to report.
- Build the reported content from those records. Where the item asks for a number, calculate it in hectares or the relevant count; where it asks for narrative, describe the issue clearly and include the before-and-after ecosystem type, the species or pollutant type, the countries or jurisdictions involved, and any other required detail.
- Record any exclusions, changes or special assumptions alongside the data. Explain what was left out, why it was left out, and any change in method, cut-off point, reference date, or classification that affects comparability.
- Check the final draft against the official source and your working papers. Confirm that every required item is covered, the evidence supports the wording and numbers, and the contextual note explains the standards, methods and assumptions used to compile the information.
Request biodiversity impact data from site and operations owners
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
Which sites, activities and supply-chain items are driving the most significant pressure on biodiversity, and what supporting evidence do we have for each one?
Use your organisation’s own site, asset, process and supplier terms first, then map them to the biodiversity categories in the reporting pack. Keep the ask in operational language that the owner already uses, and only translate into the reporting framework at the end. This is a possible LRA training template; adapt it to your organisation and check the source material before sign-off.
Weak request
Please provide the data for the biodiversity loss disclosure.
Why it fails: It uses framework language only, gives no boundary, no period, no source system, and does not tell the owner what operational records to pull. That makes it hard to answer and easy to return incomplete or inconsistent information.
Better request
Please pull the site, process and supplier records for [reporting period] within [boundary/scope] that show where our activities most affect nature. Include the site or asset name, the activity, the location, the area or quantity involved, the before/after land or ecosystem type where relevant, any water, pollution, species or invasive-species information, and the evidence source plus assumptions.
Formal email template
Subject: Request for biodiversity impact data and supporting evidence for [reporting period]\n\nHi [name/team],\n\nWe are compiling the biodiversity section of the sustainability report and need your help with the operational data and evidence for the sites, activities and suppliers that create the most material pressure on nature.\n\nPlease send, for [reporting period] and within [boundary/scope], the information you hold for:\n- the sites or assets you consider most significant for biodiversity impact;\n- any land or sea area changed from one use to another, including the area in hectares, the before/after ecosystem type, and the date or reference point used;\n- any harvesting or use of wild species, including type, quantity and any internal view of conservation concern;\n- water taken from or returned to the environment, and water used up, where this is relevant to the impact;\n- pollutants generated, by type and quantity;\n- any invasive species risk or introduction pathway linked to our activities;\n- the products, services or supply-chain items most associated with biodiversity pressure, plus the countries or jurisdictions involved;\n- the source, method, assumptions and any gaps behind the figures.\n\nIf you have the data in a spreadsheet, please return it in the table format below, together with the supporting files or links. If anything is estimated, please note the basis used.\n\nThis is a possible LRA training template; please adapt it to your organisation’s own terms and check the source material before sign-off.\n\nThanks,\n[preparer name]\n[team]\n[contact details]
Short Teams / Slack version
Hi [name/team] — could you share the biodiversity impact data for [reporting period] for [sites/assets/suppliers in scope]? Please include the site/activity name, location, what changed or was used, the area/quantity, the before/after ecosystem or species/pollutant type, the date or reference point, and any notes on method, assumptions and evidence. If easier, send your file and we’ll map it into the reporting pack. Thanks.
Industry examples
Manufacturing
Context. A plant with land take, water use, discharge and waste handling across several production lines.
Adapted request. Please send the environmental and site records for [reporting period] covering the production lines and yards that most affect nature at [plant name]. Include any land conversion, water taken and used, discharge-related pollutants, and any invasive-species pathway linked to site works, plus the map, permit, monitoring file or log behind each figure.
Example response. The site team returns a table with three records: one yard expansion of 2.4 ha from grassland to hardstanding, one abstraction record of 18,000 m3 with 12,500 m3 consumed, and one discharge record for nutrient-bearing effluent. Each row includes the site name, date, before/after land type, quantity, evidence link and notes that the land figure is based on the approved site plan.
Agriculture / Food production
Context. A farming or primary production business with habitat change, water use and harvesting activity.
Adapted request. Please provide the farm and field records for [reporting period] showing any habitat change, water use, harvesting from wild species, and any species or pest movement risk linked to our operations. Use the farm’s own field names and stock or crop terms, and include the survey, yield sheet, irrigation log or contractor note behind each entry.
Example response. The farm manager returns a spreadsheet with field-level entries: 1.8 ha of scrub converted to arable, irrigation abstraction and consumption figures, and a note that no wild species harvesting occurred. The pack also includes a field map, irrigation report and a short note explaining that the conversion date is taken from the land preparation work order.
The full request pack — response form, data table, evidence metadata and sign-off — is in the Download Centre.
Draft your disclosure
LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.
Method note
State how you defined each biodiversity pressure, which sites you treated as the most significant, what baseline date you used, and how you measured converted area in hectares.
Context note
Explain what the figures show about where biodiversity pressure is concentrated, how much natural habitat has been converted since the chosen baseline, and how much change occurred between already modified ecosystem types in the period.
Fluctuation statement
If the numbers moved materially, note whether that was driven by changes in site coverage, the baseline used, newly identified impacts, or a different amount of land or sea converted during the year.
Content index entry
GRI 101-6 Direct drivers of biodiversity loss — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre
Professional preparation tools and forms for GRI 101-6. Each download includes a concise “How to use” guide.
Assurance readiness
For each claim, check the evidence
| Claim | Risk | Evidence to check |
|---|---|---|
| We based the coverage figure on the operations and activities we had actually mapped for the reporting period, and we documented any exclusions or boundary choices before drafting the disclosure. | An assurer may test whether the population was complete, whether any sites or activities were left out without a clear reason, and whether the boundary used for the figure matches the underlying records. | Boundary memo; reporting scope list; consolidation or site register; exclusion log with reasons; sign-off from the preparer and reviewer. |
| We used the same internal scope decision for the figure throughout the draft, so the sites, activities, and time period were treated consistently from source data through to publication. | An assurer may probe for inconsistent scope treatment between datasets, versions, or sections of the report, which can lead to double counting or gaps. | Version-controlled working papers; data mapping file; reconciliation between source extracts and the final table; change log showing any scope amendments. |
| For the disclosed operations, we relied on source records from the relevant business teams and checked that the underlying data covered the full period we said it did. | An assurer may question whether the data was complete for the whole period, whether late changes were captured, and whether the right business units supplied the figures. | Source extracts; period-end cut-off notes; data request emails; completeness checklist; evidence of late adjustments and their approval. |
| Where we had to estimate or classify information, we recorded the basis used and kept enough support to show how the final figure was built. | An assurer may challenge unsupported estimates, weak classification choices, or assumptions that were not documented at the time of preparation. | Assumption log; calculation workbook; methodology note; classification guidance used by the team; supporting documents for estimates. |
| Before publication, we ran internal checks on the numbers, the labels, and the narrative so the disclosed figure agreed with the working papers and the surrounding text. | An assurer may look for arithmetic errors, mismatches between the narrative and the table, and inconsistencies between the final disclosure and the source files. | Review checklist; arithmetic check evidence; cross-reference to source data; approval trail; final proofread or editorial sign-off. |
| We kept the evidence needed to explain how the data was compiled, including the methods, assumptions, and any judgement calls made along the way. | An assurer may test whether the compilation trail is clear enough to reproduce the figure and whether the assumptions were reasonable and consistently applied. | Compilation note; methodology paper; assumption register; calculation model; reviewer comments and responses. |
Evidence pack to prepare
- The governing policy or written commitment behind this disclosure
- A methodology / definition note setting out how the disclosure was scoped and prepared
- Source-system exports the figures or facts were drawn from
- The internal approval / sign-off record for the disclosure before publication
- Minutes or records evidencing the relevant engagement or consultation
Common reporting gaps
- Figures are stated without the supporting narrative, or narrative without figures.
- Scope is inconsistent between the text and the numbers.
- The reporting boundary is left undefined.
- Material changes since the previous period are not disclosed.
- Estimates and measured values are not distinguished.
- Source records for the figures are not identified.
Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data
- Wrong owner, wrong language
The request goes to a team that does not hold the site, supply-chain, or environmental records, so they answer in framework terms instead of the organisation’s own operational labels.
- Scope left vague
The data pull starts before the team has fixed which sites, products, countries, or activities sit inside the boundary, so different contributors send incompatible sets of records.
- Timing basis mixed up
Some teams use the reporting year while others use a cut-off or reference date, which makes the figures and descriptions impossible to line up.
- Counting basis not kept separate
Area, quantity, and narrative fields are gathered on different bases and then merged, so a hectare figure is compared with a count or a description that was compiled differently.
- Source labels stripped out
The original file names, map references, permit IDs, or system tags are lost during consolidation, so no one can trace each entry back to its source record.
- Distinct groups merged together
Records for different site types, ecosystems, species, pollutants, or countries are rolled into one bucket even though they need to stay separate for the disclosure.
- Evidence details not captured
The team saves the headline number but not the supporting notes on method, assumptions, standards used, or the date and owner of the source evidence.
- No review trail
Draft data moves by email or chat without a clear sign-off chain, so nobody can show who checked the figures, who approved changes, or when the final version was agreed.
Where judgement is often needed
- Set the group boundary after a buy-in or sale
If a site or activity has moved in or out during the year, state whether you count it from the deal date, the control date, or the full year, and explain the cut-off used in the context note.
- Choose one local naming system and map the rest
Where country teams use different habitat or ecosystem labels, pick a single internal classification for the report, show how local terms were translated, and note any places where the mapping is approximate.
- Decide how to treat assets sitting on the edge of the footprint
For locations that are partly inside the reporting perimeter or only partly linked to the relevant activity, explain whether you included the whole site, only the affected area, or excluded it, and why.
- Fix the date basis before compiling conversion figures
Use one clear reference date for land or sea conversion and one reporting period for annual movement, then disclose both so readers can see what sits in the opening balance and what sits in-year.
- Separate measured figures from modelled estimates
If some hectares, volumes, or quantities come from surveys, maps, or calculations rather than direct counts, label the method used for each line and say where judgement or estimation was needed.
- State how you handled mixed-use or mixed-impact sites
When one location contains several land uses, water uses, or pollution sources, explain whether you split the data by source, grouped it at site level, or assigned it to the main driver, and keep the approach consistent.
- Apply one rounding rule across all figures
If you round areas, quantities, or counts, use the same rule everywhere, disclose the precision chosen, and make sure subtotals still reconcile to the total after rounding.
- Aggregate sensitive location details where needed
If naming a site, species, or country would create privacy, security, or legal issues, combine the data at a higher level and say what was grouped together and what was left out.
- Explain how you treated cross-border operations
For activities spanning more than one country or jurisdiction, show the basis used to assign impacts to each place, and disclose any residual amounts that could not be cleanly split.
- Clarify whether legacy impacts are in or out
If the footprint includes older land conversion, historic extraction, or past pollution that still affects biodiversity, state whether you included it in the current figures or only described it narratively, and explain the rule used.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Food processing · synthetic · written by LRA
This example shows how to summarise the main biodiversity pressures, identify the sites with the greatest effects, and report land conversion since a chosen baseline. The figures are internally consistent and illustrative only.
Synthetic illustration only. We describe the main pressures linked to our biodiversity impacts and point to the locations where those pressures are most material.
- The main pressures we track are changes in land use and the way land is managed; our most affected locations are two processing-adjacent sites in a river catchment and one storage site near a coastal wetland.
- Since our 2018 baseline, we have converted 12 ha of natural habitat: 7 ha moved from mixed woodland to industrial hardstanding and 5 ha moved from seasonal wet grassland to warehouse yards.
- During the reporting year, we also changed 4 ha between intensively used or modified land types, all within already developed areas.
Renewable energy · synthetic · written by LRA
This example illustrates a second plausible reporter with different sites, a different baseline, and different conversion pathways. It keeps the totals and sub-totals internally consistent and uses only synthetic figures.
Synthetic illustration only. We set out the pressures most closely linked to our biodiversity footprint and the places where those effects are concentrated.
- The key pressures are changes in land use and changes in how land is used; the sites with the greatest effects are one solar park edge, one substation corridor, and one access-road area.
- Using 2020 as our reference point, we have converted 9 ha of natural habitat: 6 ha from native scrub to maintained grassland and 3 ha from marshy meadow to service infrastructure.
- In the reporting period, 2 ha shifted between intensively used or modified land categories, with no conversion of natural habitat in the year.
Draft output & visualisation ideas
How to turn the collected data into a draft disclosure. Suggested visuals and a GRI content-index line generated from this disclosure's datapoints.
Suggested visuals
- Main causes of biodiversity pressure — bar: A ranking of the main direct pressures on biodiversity, using the collected driver categories to show which factors are most prominent.
- Where the biggest biodiversity impacts sit — map: The locations of sites with the most significant biodiversity impacts, so readers can see the geographic spread of the highest-impact places.
- Natural habitat converted since the chosen baseline — table: For each recorded case, the area converted, the baseline date used, and the ecosystem type before and after conversion.
- Change from one modified ecosystem to another — bar: The area of land or sea shifted between already intensively used or altered ecosystem types during the reporting period.
- Conversion by ecosystem type before and after — stacked bar: A side-by-side view of ecosystem types before conversion and the resulting ecosystem types after conversion, to show the pattern of change.
From a number to a disclosure
What separates a figure from a disclosure.
Basic
We recorded one main pressure on nature loss: land conversion.
Better
We recorded 12 ha of land converted this year, from semi-natural grassland to an industrial yard, and we used our 2020 baseline to identify the change.
Best
We recorded 12 ha of land converted this year, all from semi-natural grassland to an industrial yard, against our 2020 baseline, and the increase from last year reflects a new site build-out rather than any change in our method.
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. The confidence label shows how closely each match maps to GRI 101-6 — these are report practice, not exact disclosure examples.
| Company | Sector · Country | Year | Match | Page | Report | Assurance | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
MOEVE, S.A. | Oil and Gas · Spain | 2025 | Partial | p. 111 →p. 113 →p. 151 → | Consolidated Management Report 2025 → | EY; BSI | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evidence in MOEVE, S.A.’s reportWhat the report shows Moeve, S.A.'s 2025 Consolidated Management Report includes narrative disclosures on direct drivers of biodiversity loss at its facilities, specifically mentioning significant spills (p.113) and listing locations with impacts on biodiversity (p.111). The report references GRI 101-5 and 101-6 standards in relation to biodiversity impacts and direct drivers (p.151, p.162). However, the report does not provide quantifiable area values or detailed numeric data on biodiversity impacts, and many expected narrative items related to biodiversity are not found in the report.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Wilmar International | Food Production — Agricultural · Singapore | 2024 | Partial | p. 9 →p. 17 →p. 18 → | Sustainability Report 2024 → | EY | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evidence in Wilmar International’s reportWhat the report shows Wilmar International’s 2024 Sustainability Report includes a Biodiversity and Conservation section referencing GRI 101-6 on direct drivers of biodiversity loss and GRI 101-8 on identification (p.17). The report mentions zero deforestation in High Carbon Stock (HCS) forests and High Conservation Value (HCV) areas covering 31,842 hectares (p.12), as well as biodiversity initiatives targeting 3,000 hectares outside concessions by 2050 and a landscape project of 2,783 hectares beyond company land (p.15). However, the report lacks detailed narrative or numeric data on specific direct drivers, impacts, or dependencies related to biodiversity beyond these points, and some methodology or narrative elements remain unclear.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Godrej Properties Limited | Real Estate · India | 2025 | Exact | p. 63 →p. 264 →p. 161 → | Integrated Report 2024-25 → | KPMG | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evidence in Godrej Properties Limited’s reportWhat the report shows Godrej Properties Limited’s Integrated Report 2024-25 includes narrative coverage on biodiversity, specifically addressing direct drivers of biodiversity loss and efforts to preserve and nurture biodiversity on page 264. The report references GRI standards related to biodiversity and emissions, with some discussion of metrics and targets for managing climate-related risks on page 270. However, the report does not provide clear or quotable evidence on specific quantitative biodiversity area values or detailed methodology, leaving some aspects of disclosure unclear or missing.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Check your understanding
A preparer is compiling the biodiversity note for a manufacturing group with three operating sites. Two sites have minor effects, but one coastal site has the clearest pressure on habitats because it expanded onto former scrubland and also discharges process water.Which site should be highlighted, and what broad pressure types should be described for it?
Model answer. The site with the most material effect on biodiversity should be singled out, not the whole portfolio if one location stands out. For that site, the description should cover the main direct pressures that are driving the impact, such as changes to land or marine area, resource use, pollution, or the spread of non-native species, using the facts that best explain why that site matters most.
Why this matters. Focus on the locations where the biodiversity effect is greatest, then explain the main direct pressures behind that effect.
A land development team converted 12.4 ha of natural wet grassland into an industrial yard after the group’s reference date of 1 January 2022. The same project also changed 3.6 ha of already heavily managed farmland into another intensively used land use during the year.How should the two land-change events be separated in the disclosure, and what details need to be kept distinct?
Model answer. The two events should not be merged. The natural habitat conversion needs its own record with the area converted, the date used as the cut-off or reference point, and the ecosystem type before and after the change; the shift between two already modified systems should be reported separately with its own area and the ecosystem type before and after that change.
Why this matters. Keep natural habitat loss separate from changes between already altered systems, and pair each area with the right before-and-after ecosystem description.
A fishing business buys wild-caught shellfish from two regions. One source is a common species with stable stocks, while the other is a species assessed as facing a high extinction threat; the procurement team has weights for each source and the species names are recorded in the catch logs.What should the preparer include for the wild-harvested resource section, and how should the risk information be handled?
Model answer. The disclosure should identify the kinds of wild species taken, the amount harvested for each relevant source, and the level of extinction concern for those species. The risk description should be tied to the species actually harvested, so the higher-risk shellfish source should be clearly distinguished from the lower-risk one rather than blended into a single category.
Why this matters. When wild species are harvested, report the species, the quantities, and the extinction concern for each relevant source.
A food processor uses large volumes of water and generates nutrient-rich effluent. It also imports packaging materials from a supplier in another country, and the logistics team has flagged a risk that hitchhiking organisms could arrive with returned pallets.Which direct pressure types should be captured here, and what extra explanation is needed for the possible species introduction route?
Model answer. The preparer should cover the water-related pressure and the pollution pressure, then separately note any non-native species that have been introduced or could be introduced. For the possible introduction route, the explanation should describe how that could happen in practice, such as through imported goods, transport equipment, or other pathways relevant to the business, rather than just naming the species.
Why this matters. Water use, pollution, and possible species introductions are separate pressure areas, and any introduction route should be explained in practical terms.
Analyse this disclosure across real reports
See how companies actually report GRI 101-6 — drawn from their own published reports, with the exact pages, and an LRA AI-assistant that works through it with you. Available to LRA Community members and to students throughout their platform access.
Related framework references
How this disclosure maps across the major reporting frameworks.
→
ESRSRelated
ESRS E4
Biodiversity and Ecosystems — closest topical match (post-Omnibus ESRS catalogue).
→
IFRSNo equivalent
—
No direct IFRS S1/S2 topical equivalent.
Related & explore
Questions this page answers
For GRI 101-6 Biodiversity, what should I use this page for before I start collecting data?
Use it as a working guide to understand the disclosure, see which datapoints to prepare, and follow the step-by-step preparation flow. It is designed to help you move from source data to a draft disclosure and an assurance-ready evidence pack. ↑ section
Which biodiversity datapoints does the GRI 101-6 page say I need to gather?
The page lists datapoints covering main biodiversity pressures, highest impact sites, land and sea conversion, modified ecosystem change, resource use impacts, wild species taken, water taken and used up, pollution impacts, introduced invasive species, high-impact products, activity countries, other jurisdictions, and compilation notes. Use the page’s datapoint list as your collection checklist. ↑ section
How do I decide the scope for GRI 101-6 Biodiversity on this page?
The page points you to the main biodiversity pressures, highest impact sites, and the location fields such as activity countries and other jurisdictions. Use those fields to define what is in scope and to keep the disclosure tied to the places and activities that matter most. ↑ section
What evidence should I keep for GRI 101-6 Biodiversity so the disclosure is assurance-ready?
The page includes an evidence pack with five items and a separate set of assurance claims to verify. Use both together so you can show where each datapoint came from, how it was compiled, and what checks were performed. ↑ section
What are the six assurance claims on the GRI 101-6 Biodiversity page and how do I use them?
The page says there are six assurance claims to verify, each with a claim, risk and evidence angle. Use them as a review checklist to test whether the disclosure is complete, consistent and supported by evidence before sign-off. ↑ section
What are the most common mistakes the GRI 101-6 Biodiversity page warns about?
The page has a section on common reporting gaps and mistakes, so it is meant to help you spot missing or inconsistent inputs before drafting. Use it as a final quality check alongside the evidence pack and compilation notes. ↑ section
How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for GRI 101-6 Biodiversity?
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format. Use it to organise the datapoints, track preparation, and support assurance readiness rather than building the disclosure from scratch in a blank file. ↑ section
What is the printable Library Card for GRI 101-6 Biodiversity for?
The Download Centre includes a printable Library Card in PDF format. Use it as a quick reference while preparing the disclosure, especially if you want a concise checklist beside the workbook. ↑ section
How can I turn the GRI 101-6 Biodiversity data into a draft disclosure?
The page has a draft-output section with visualisation ideas, narrative starters and a GRI content-index line. Use those prompts to turn your compiled data into a first draft that is easier to review and refine. ↑ section
Can I reuse GRI 101-6 Biodiversity data for ESRS E4 (Biodiversity and Ecosystems)?
The page says ESRS E4 is the closest correspondence, so the same underlying data may be reusable across both. Treat that as a practical cross-check, but do not assume the reporting asks are identical. ↑ section
Where can I see real company reports linked from the GRI 101-6 Biodiversity page?
The page includes a 'From company reports' table with links to published reports where the topic is disclosed. Use it for examples of how others have presented similar information, not as a substitute for the page’s own guidance. ↑ section
More questions this page can help with
- What does the GRI 101-6 Biodiversity page mean by main biodiversity pressures?
- How should I use the highest impact sites field in the GRI 101-6 Biodiversity workbook?
- What should I record for land and sea conversion in GRI 101-6 Biodiversity?
- How do I complete the before conversion habitat and after conversion habitat fields?
- What is the difference between converted natural area and modified ecosystem change on this page?
- What data do I need for wild species taken, wild species quantity and extinction risk level?
- How should I capture water taken and water used up for GRI 101-6 Biodiversity?
- What should I include for pollution impacts, pollutant type and pollutant quantity?
- How do I document introduced invasive species and introduction pathway?
- What should go into the compilation notes for GRI 101-6 Biodiversity?
- How do I use the narrative starters on the GRI 101-6 Biodiversity page to write a draft?
- What should I pull from the evidence pack before assurance review of GRI 101-6 Biodiversity?
✓ LRA AI Assistant · human-in-the-loop
Ask Study Studio AI assistant about this disclosure
Get a practical answer for your reporting context. Your first answer is free — create a free account to continue the conversation.
Try
Sources, status and disclaimer
This LRA assistance tool is designed for educational and internal data-collection purposes. It is not an official interpretation of the GRI Standards, IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards or EU CSRD/ESRS requirements. When applying these frameworks in professional practice, users should consult and double-check the official standards, guidance and applicable regulatory sources.
