Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to identify the locations where its activities are causing, or are likely to cause, impacts on biodiversity. In practice, that means reporting the places that matter most for biodiversity risk and impact, rather than giving only a general statement about nature-related issues. The focus is on being specific about where those impacts occur across the organisation’s footprint.
The practical emphasis is on coverage: the organisation should consider its operations, sites, and other relevant locations, and not limit the reporting to a few flagship or well-known sites if impacts also arise elsewhere. The aim is to show where biodiversity-related effects are happening so readers can understand the geographic spread of the issue and how broadly it is managed.
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
＋ Show GRI 101-5 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
Describe what happens at each site.
State the countries or territories where the related products and services are carried out.
Give the site’s distance from any ecologically sensitive area.
Say whether the site is inside or close to an ecologically sensitive area.
Provide the site location.
List any other countries or territories involved.
Identify the products and services in the supply chain with the greatest biodiversity impact.
Identify the sites with the greatest biodiversity impact.
State the area in hectares.
Specify the kind of ecologically sensitive area.
How to prepare it
1Start by deciding which locations belong in the disclosure: include the places where your organisation’s activities have the strongest effect on biodiversity, and also the products and services in the supply chain that drive the most material biodiversity impact.
2For each included site, record the basic site details you will report: where it is, how large it is in hectares, and what work happens there.
3Check whether each site is in, or close to, an area that is environmentally sensitive. If it is, capture the distance to that area and identify the type of sensitive area involved.
4Gather the source evidence before drafting the disclosure. Use internal records, site information, maps, operational data and supply-chain information that support the site list, the site characteristics and the country or jurisdiction details for the relevant products and services.
5Assemble the final response in a clear structure: list the relevant sites, then the supply-chain products and services, then the countries or jurisdictions where the related activities occur, and finally any other countries or jurisdictions that need to be shown.
6Before sign-off, document any exclusions, boundary changes or updates to the site list and compare the completed disclosure back to the official source to make sure nothing required has been missed or described inconsistently.
Request the data
Request site and supply-chain location evidence from EHS / Operations
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
Which sites and related supply-chain activities are the ones we should treat as having the most material biodiversity impacts, and what are their key location details?
Use your organisation’s own site, asset, depot, plant, project, route, supplier, or service-area terms first, then map them to the reporting fields. Keep the ask in operational language rather than framework wording, and check the official source before sign-off.
Weak request
Please provide the biodiversity locations disclosure data for GRI 101-5, including all sites with the most significant impacts, their locations, hectares, proximity to ecologically sensitive areas, and related supply-chain jurisdictions.
Why it fails: This uses framework language that many operational teams will not recognise, and it does not tell the owner how to pull the information from their own systems. It also leaves out the practical labels they can use internally, so the response is more likely to be incomplete or inconsistent.
Better request
Please send the list of sites, projects, depots, plants, or other operating locations that you think have the biggest nature impacts for [reporting period], plus the related supply-chain activities. For each one, include the site name, location, size in hectares, whether it is in or near a sensitive ecological area, the distance and type of that area, the main activity there, and any linked products or services with the countries or jurisdictions involved. Use your own operational terms first, then we will map them to the reporting fields.
Industry examples
Draft your disclosure
Notes that turn data into a disclosure
LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.
Method note
Explain which sites and supply-chain activities were included, how the organisation defined the locations and activities it treated as most significant, and how it assessed proximity to sensitive natural areas.
Context note
Set out what the figures show about where the main biodiversity pressures sit, which sites or supply-chain activities matter most, and how close those locations are to sensitive natural areas.
Fluctuation statement
If the pattern changed from the previous period, note whether that was driven by changes in site coverage, activity mix, location data, or the way proximity to sensitive natural areas was assessed.
Content index entry
GRI 101-5 Locations with biodiversity impacts — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre
Preparation tools & forms
Professional preparation tools for GRI 101-5 — free with an LRA Community membership. Register once (it's free) and every download unlocks, together with the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI-assistant.
Free · Community members
Assurance readiness
For each claim, check the evidence
Evidence pack to prepare
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.
Common gaps
Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data
Wrong owner for site data
People often ask the sustainability team first, when the site manager, property lead, or supply-chain owner holds the location details and activity notes.
Using framework terms too early
Requests go out in disclosure language instead of the organisation’s own site, asset, or product terms, so teams cannot match the ask to their records.
Scope not pinned down
The data pull starts before it is clear which sites, products, and jurisdictions are in scope, so the list is incomplete or includes the wrong population.
Timing basis left vague
Teams mix current site status with older records because no one fixes the reporting period or the cut-off date before collection starts.
Counting bases mixed together
One file combines site counts, area totals, and country lists without separating the different ways each field is measured.
Source labels stripped out
Original file names, map references, register IDs, or system tags are lost during consolidation, making it hard to trace each figure back to its source.
Separate groups merged
Sites, supply-chain products, and other jurisdictions get rolled into one list even though they need to stay distinct for the data pull.
Evidence details not captured
The team saves the answer but not the supporting note, map extract, date stamp, or other source metadata needed to show where it came from.
No sign-off trail
Draft data moves on without a named reviewer and approval record, so nobody can show who checked the figures before they were used.
Where judgement is often needed
Setting the cut-off for sites after a buy-in or sale
Use one clear rule for when a site enters or leaves the list, and explain whether you used the position at period end, an average view, or another cut-off so readers can see why the named places changed.
Choosing the country label where local boundaries differ
Where a site sits in a place that is described differently by local authorities, map it to one consistent country or jurisdiction basis, and note the source used so the same place is not counted differently across the group.
Handling a site that sits on the edge of a sensitive area
If only part of a site is close to a protected or otherwise sensitive place, state the basis used to decide whether it is included, and describe any threshold or buffer applied.
Deciding whether to list a shared or multi-tenant location
For premises used with others, explain whether you included the whole location or only the part under your control, and make the same control test apply across all sites.
Selecting the measure for site size
Choose one area basis for all locations, keep it consistent, and disclose if the figure comes from plans, mapping tools, or a measured survey rather than a direct count.
Using estimates where exact figures are not available
If you cannot measure a distance, area, or site attribute directly, use a reasonable estimate, say so plainly, and identify the method and any main assumptions.
Grouping locations to protect sensitive information
When naming every place would create a privacy, security, or commercial issue, combine sites into a higher-level location group and explain the level of aggregation used.
Applying one biodiversity sensitivity test across countries
If local lists or classifications differ, use one internal rule to decide what counts as a sensitive area and disclose the reference set or screening approach behind that rule.
Rounding site distances and areas
Set a single rounding rule for hectares and distances, apply it consistently, and make sure the rounded figures still match the underlying site list and totals.
Separating direct sites from supply-chain places
Keep your own locations distinct from places linked to products or services in the wider chain, and explain the basis used to decide which activities belong in each list.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — food processing
*Synthetic illustration only.* We identify the sites in our own operations that create the greatest pressure on nature, and for each one we note where it is, how large it is, whether it sits close to a sensitive habitat, how far away that habitat is, what kind of sensitive area it is, and the main work carried out there. - Our two most material sites are a grain-milling plant in East Anglia, UK (18 ha), 4 km from a designated wetland reserve, where we mill and store cereals; and an edible-oil refinery in Rotterdam, Netherlands (12 ha), 2 km from a river estuary protected area, where we refine, blend and package oils. - In our wider value chain, the product lines with the most material nature impacts are palm oil from Indonesia and Malaysia, soy ingredients from Brazil and Argentina, and cocoa from Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana; the related farming, primary processing and export activities take place in those countries, with supporting trading and logistics activity also occurring in the UK, the Netherlands and Singapore.
Illustrative only: this example shows how a reporter can describe the sites it operates, the nearby sensitive areas, and the main value-chain products and jurisdictions linked to the most significant biodiversity impacts.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — consumer electronics assembly
*Synthetic illustration only.* We map the places in our own business that are most closely linked to biodiversity pressure, recording the site, its size, its proximity to a sensitive habitat, the habitat type, and the activities carried out there. - Our two most material sites are a component assembly campus in Penang, Malaysia (9 ha), 1 km from a mangrove conservation zone, where we assemble circuit boards and test devices; and a distribution and repair hub in Guadalajara, Mexico (7 ha), 6 km from a dry-forest reserve, where we store finished goods, repair returned units and manage spare parts. - In the supply chain, the product and service areas with the greatest nature impacts are mined metals from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Chile, semiconductor fabrication in Taiwan and South Korea, and battery-cell production in China and Poland; the associated work also involves sourcing and logistics activity in Japan, the United States and Germany.
Illustrative only: this example shows how a reporter can describe its own sites and the upstream and downstream jurisdictions tied to the most significant biodiversity impacts.
Company reports
How companies report GRI 101-5
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. These are report practice, not exact disclosure templates to copy.
MOEVE, S.A.
Oil and Gas · Spain · 2025
Moeve, S.A.'s 2025 Consolidated Management Report provides detailed coverage of biodiversity impacts, including a table of facilities with area of occupation and activities on site (p.111), and references to managing biodiversity loss and significant spills (p.111, p.113). The report also includes data on water use by area and source (p.110) and discusses waste management activities, noting no recovery disposal operations at their facilities (p.114). However, there is no clear evidence of numeric values or narrative items beyond these points, and some aspects of biodiversity impact management and waste-related impacts are mentioned but not fully detailed in the provided excerpts.
Tata AutoComp Systems Limited
Automobiles and Components · India · 2025
Tata AutoComp Systems Limited’s Sustainability Report FY 2024-25 includes narrative coverage on biodiversity, noting the establishment of a robust, data-driven foundation for biodiversity management in FY 2024-25 (p.74). The report also addresses governance and risk management related to sustainability, with references to corporate overview and governance structures (p.114), and discusses supply chain assessment prioritizing Tier 1 significant suppliers (p.52). However, the report does not provide specific quantitative data such as area (ha) values or numeric biodiversity impact figures, and some narrative details remain absent or unclear.
Sands China Ltd.
Hotels, Restaurants, Leisure, Tourism Services · Macao · 2025
Sands China Ltd.'s 2025 ESG Report includes coverage of biodiversity impact assessments, reporting the number of sites with such assessments and the area of operational sites involved (p.37). The report also addresses management of material topics and waste, referencing GRI standards with specific pages noted for further detail (p.52). However, the report lacks clear quantitative data on the exact area in hectares for biodiversity impact assessments and some narrative items are missing or unclear, limiting a full understanding of the scope and impact.
✓ 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.
TryHow do I prepare GRI 101-5?What data do I need to collect?Where can I see a real-report example?What mistakes should I avoid?
1 free answer
Check your understanding
Scenarios to work through
A manufacturer has three plants, but only one has the clearest pressure on local habitats because it sits beside a protected wetland and uses the largest land area. The reporting team is deciding which places to include in the disclosure.
QShould the team list only that one plant, or should it also include any other places that are the main sources of biodiversity pressure?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑The team should identify the places that drive the most significant biodiversity pressure and include the relevant details for each of them. If more than one site is material on that basis, they should not narrow the list to just the most obvious one.
Why this matters · Focus on the sites that matter most for biodiversity impact, not every location by default.
A logistics depot is 2.4 km from a marshland that is recognised as sensitive, and the site file also notes the depot covers 18 ha. The preparer is unsure whether the proximity detail is needed because the area is outside the site boundary.
QWhat information should be captured about the depot’s relationship to the sensitive area?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑The disclosure should show whether the site is in or near a sensitive area, give the distance, and name the type of sensitive area. The fact that the area is outside the boundary does not remove the need to describe the connection if the site is near it.
Why this matters · Record both the proximity and the kind of sensitive area, not just the site’s own footprint.
A quarry operates extraction, blasting, water pumping and vehicle loading on the same land parcel. The sustainability lead has drafted a short note that says only “quarrying operations” and is unsure whether that is enough.
QHow specific should the description of on-site activity be?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑The description should explain what actually happens at the site in practical terms, so a broad label alone is too thin. It should make clear the main activities taking place there, such as extraction, blasting, pumping and loading, where those are the relevant operations.
Why this matters · Describe the real work carried out at each place, not just a generic site label.
A food company buys cocoa and palm oil through separate supply chains. The team knows the farming stage creates the strongest biodiversity pressure, but the farms are in several countries and some sourcing records are incomplete.
QWhat should the team do when mapping the supply-chain products and services linked to the biggest biodiversity impacts?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑The team should identify the products and services in the chain that are most connected to biodiversity pressure, then state the countries or jurisdictions where the related activities happen. If there are additional countries or jurisdictions involved beyond the main ones, those should also be listed.
Why this matters · Link the high-impact products to where the related activities take place, and include any other relevant jurisdictions too.
Framework references
Related framework references
How this disclosure maps across the major reporting frameworks.
Primary
Related & explore
Policies to halt and reverse biodiversity loss → Guide ✓Management of biodiversity impacts → Guide ✓Access and benefit-sharing → Guide ✓Identification of biodiversity impacts → Guide ✓Direct drivers of biodiversity loss → Guide ✓Changes to the state of biodiversity → Guide ✓Show all 7 related disclosures →
FAQ
Questions this page answers
How do I use the GRI 101-5 Biodiversity page to draft the disclosure from scratch?+−
Start with the plain-language explainer, then work through the step-by-step preparation section and the datapoints list. The page also gives draft-output ideas, so you can turn the collected data into a first-pass narrative and content-index line.
What data do I need to collect for GRI 101-5 Biodiversity before I start writing?+−
The page says to prepare data on high-impact sites, site location, site area, sensitive-area flag, distance to sensitivity, sensitive-area type, site activities, high-impact supply items, operating countries and other jurisdictions. Use that list as your collection checklist so you do not miss any core fields.
How should I decide which sites count as high-impact sites for this disclosure?+−
The page tells you to prepare a high-impact sites datapoint, but it does not define the test for inclusion. Use the page’s step-by-step preparation guidance and keep your scope decision and rationale documented in the evidence pack.
What should I do if I do not have exact site-area or distance-to-sensitivity data for GRI 101-5?+−
The page expects those datapoints to be prepared, so missing values should be treated as a data gap to resolve or clearly explain. Check the common reporting gaps section and keep the source evidence and any assumptions in the workbook and evidence pack.
Who should own the GRI 101-5 Biodiversity data collection in practice?+−
The page is designed for sustainability/ESG managers, HR or data owners, and assurance reviewers, so ownership should sit with the people who can source the site, supply-chain and jurisdiction data. The workbook is there to help assign and track that work.
What evidence pack do I need to make GRI 101-5 Biodiversity assurance-ready?+−
The page includes an evidence pack with five items for assurance readiness, alongside six claims to verify. Use those materials to link each reported datapoint back to source records, methodology notes and supporting documents.
What are the six assurance claims on the GRI 101-5 Biodiversity page and how do I use them?+−
The page says there are six claims to verify, each with a claim, risk and evidence prompt. Use them as an assurance checklist so you can test whether the disclosure is supported and where the main risk areas sit.
What are the common mistakes people make when reporting GRI 101-5 Biodiversity?+−
The page has a section on common reporting gaps and mistakes, which is there to help you spot missing scope, incomplete site data and weak evidence before sign-off. Use it as a pre-submission review against your draft and workbook outputs.
How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for GRI 101-5 Biodiversity?+−
The workbook is listed in the Download Centre as an .xlsx file, so it is the main working tool for collecting, checking and organising the disclosure inputs. Use it alongside the printable Library Card if you want a quick reference during drafting or review.
Can I use the synthetic example disclosure on the GRI 101-5 Biodiversity page as a template for my own draft?+−
Yes, but only as a synthetic illustration of how the disclosure can be presented. The page also includes a quantitative table, so you can mirror the format while replacing the example values with your own internally consistent data.
How does the GRI 101-5 Biodiversity page help me map data for ESRS E4 Biodiversity and Ecosystems?+−
The page says ESRS E4 is the closest correspondence, which is useful for thinking about reuse of data across frameworks. It does not say the requirements are identical, so treat it as a cross-reference for data alignment rather than a one-to-one mapping.
More questions this page can help with
GRI 101-5 Biodiversity datapoints checklist for site location, area, sensitivity and supply itemsHow to evidence high-impact sites for GRI 101-5 BiodiversityGRI 101-5 Biodiversity workbook download what is includedHow to write the draft narrative for GRI 101-5 BiodiversityGRI 101-5 Biodiversity common reporting gaps and mistakesWhat evidence should I keep for GRI 101-5 Biodiversity assuranceGRI 101-5 Biodiversity synthetic example disclosure tableGRI 101-5 Biodiversity content index line exampleESRS E4 data reuse for GRI 101-5 BiodiversityWho should own GRI 101-5 Biodiversity data collectionHow to use the printable Library Card for GRI 101-5 BiodiversityGRI 101-5 Biodiversity step-by-step preparation guide
Free · LRA Community
Get your GRI 101-5 tools — free
Your preparation tools are free for LRA Community members and students. Register once (it's free) and your download starts right away — plus the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI-assistant.
✓
You're in — your download is starting
Your file is downloading now. Your Community Cabinet — with the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI-assistant — is ready too.
Open your Cabinet →