Disclosure LibraryPractitioner guidance for every reporting disclosure
Home Disclosure Library GRI GRI 308 GRI 308-2
GRI 308: Supplier Environmental Assessment · 2016
Disclosure GRI 308-2

Negative environmental impacts in the supply chain and actions taken

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.

Dr Ross Kurinko, GRI Certified Trainer
Reviewed by Dr Ross Kurinko · GRI Certified Trainer LRA educational guidance · Not issued or endorsed by GRI
To prepare this disclosure
Disclosure focus

This disclosure asks an organisation to explain whether it has identified significant negative environmental impacts in its supply chain, and what it has done in response. In practice, the focus is on the impacts themselves, the parts of the supply chain where they occur, and the actions taken to address them, rather than on general sustainability activity or only on the organisation’s own operations.

The practical question is how far the organisation’s review reaches across its supply chain and how it decides what to include. A narrow approach might only cover a few high-risk suppliers or flagship products, while a broader approach would look across relevant tiers, categories, or geographies where the organisation’s purchasing could be linked to environmental harm. The report should make clear the scope covered, the main issues found, and the response taken.

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
Suppliers reviewed The count of suppliers that were actually reviewed for environmental impact issues in the reporting period. Supplier review log, assessment tracker, procurement or ESG due diligence records showing the supplier list and completed reviews. Procurement / Sustainability
Suppliers with major impacts The count of suppliers found to have material actual or possible negative environmental impacts from the review. Assessment outcomes, risk ratings, audit findings, issue registers, and supplier due diligence records showing which suppliers met the materiality threshold. Procurement / Sustainability
Supply chain impact themes A short description of the main actual and possible negative environmental impacts found across the supply chain. Consolidated assessment summary, audit reports, corrective action logs, and issue themes from supplier reviews. Sustainability / Procurement
Agreed supplier fixes The share of identified suppliers for whom improvement actions were agreed after the review. Corrective action plans, supplier meeting notes, remediation trackers, and signed follow-up actions linked to the assessed suppliers. Procurement / Supplier management
Supplier exits rate The share of identified suppliers for whom the business ended the relationship after the review. Termination notices, supplier exit approvals, procurement records, and the assessment file showing which identified suppliers were exited. Procurement / Legal
Exit reasons The reasons the business ended supplier relationships after the review, for the suppliers that were exited. Termination letters, procurement decision papers, supplier case notes, and governance approvals explaining each exit decision. Procurement / Legal
+ Show GRI 308-2 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)

How to prepare it

1Set the reporting boundary first: decide which supplier relationships you will include in the review, and make that scope clear before you start counting or describing impacts.
2Agree your working definitions for the assessment: specify what you will treat as an environmental impact, what counts as a significant issue, and how you will recognise an actual problem versus a possible one.
3Gather the underlying evidence for each supplier in scope, so you can support the count of suppliers reviewed, the count flagged for significant environmental harm, and the impact topics you identify.
4Compile the reported outputs from the assessment into the required figures and narrative: the number reviewed, the number flagged, the impact description, the share where improvements were agreed, and the share where the relationship ended, plus the reasons for any exits.
5Record any exclusions, changes in scope, or methodological choices that affect the numbers or wording, so a reviewer can see why a supplier was included, left out, or treated differently.
6Check the final disclosure back against the official source and your evidence pack, confirming the figures, percentages, and explanations are internally consistent and match the underlying assessment records.
Request the data

Request supplier impact assessment and follow-up actions data

Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.

Which suppliers were reviewed for environmental issues, which ones were flagged as material, and what follow-up action was agreed or taken?

Use your own supplier-management language first, then map it to the reporting fields. For example, if your team talks about vendors, contractors, approved suppliers, or category lists, use those terms in the request and only translate them into the reporting labels when you compile the response. Keep the ask in the way your team already tracks supplier reviews, corrective actions, and exits.

Weak request

Please provide the GRI 308-2 data for the year, including the number of suppliers assessed, the number with significant actual and potential negative environmental impacts, the impacts identified, the percentage with improvements agreed, the percentage terminated, and the reasons for termination.

Why it fails: This uses reporting jargon that many operational teams do not track day to day, so it is harder to answer quickly and accurately. It also does not say which supplier set, system, method, or internal labels to use, so the result may be incomplete or inconsistent.

Better request

Please pull the supplier review extract for [period] from [system/process]. We need the count of suppliers reviewed for environmental issues, the count flagged as material, the issue types found, the share with agreed follow-up, the share where the supplier relationship ended, and the reasons for any exits. Include the supplier scope, the review method, and any internal notes so we can map your terms into the reporting fields.

Formal email template
Subject: Request for supplier environmental review data for [reporting period]\n\nHi [name/team],\n\nI’m pulling together the supplier review information for [reporting period] and need your help with the data from [system/process name].\n\nPlease send the following for the supplier set you cover:\n- how many suppliers were reviewed for environmental issues\n- how many were flagged as material on environmental grounds\n- the main issue types identified\n- the share of flagged suppliers where an improvement plan or other follow-up was agreed\n- the share of flagged suppliers where the relationship ended after the review\n- the reasons for any exits\n\nPlease also include the period covered, the supplier population used, the method or source used to review them, and any notes needed to explain the figures. If you use different internal terms, please keep those in your extract and add a short mapping note.\n\nA possible LRA training template is attached below for reference only; please adapt this to your organisation and check the official source before sign-off.\n\nThanks,\n[Your name]
Short Teams / Slack version
Hi [name] — could you share the supplier review data for [period]? I need: suppliers reviewed, suppliers flagged for material environmental issues, the main issue types, the share with agreed follow-up, the share exited, and exit reasons. Please include the source, scope, and any internal notes. Use your team’s own terms if easier, then we can map them. Thanks.
Industry examples
Food manufacturing

Context. The procurement team tracks approved ingredient suppliers, audit findings, and corrective action plans.

Adapted request. Please share the approved-supplier audit data for [period]: how many ingredient suppliers were reviewed for environmental issues, how many were marked as material, what the main findings were, how many had corrective actions agreed, how many were removed from the approved list, and why. Include the audit source, supplier list used, and any category-specific notes.

Example response. Reviewed: 84 approved ingredient suppliers. Flagged as material: 11. Main findings: wastewater handling, packaging waste, and chemical storage. Improvement agreed: 8 of 11. Removed from approved list: 2 of 11. Exit reasons: repeated audit failures and refusal to close out actions.

Construction

Context. The commercial and procurement teams manage subcontractor prequalification, site compliance checks, and supplier exits.

Adapted request. Please provide the subcontractor environmental review summary for [period]: number of subcontractors checked, number flagged for material environmental issues, the issue types, the share with agreed remediation, the share removed from the supply chain, and the reasons for removal. Use the prequalification and site-compliance records as the source, and note the package or trade category for each supplier.

Example response. Reviewed: 37 subcontractors. Flagged as material: 6. Main findings: dust control, waste segregation, and fuel spill controls. Improvement agreed: 5 of 6. Removed from supply chain: 1 of 6. Exit reason: repeated failure to meet site environmental controls.

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 suppliers were included in the review, how environmental harm was defined for the assessment, and whether the figures cover the full reporting period or only completed checks.

Context note

Set out what the numbers show about the supply base: how broad the review was, how many suppliers raised concern, what kinds of environmental problems were found, and how often the response was to agree improvements or end the relationship.

Fluctuation statement

If the figures moved materially from the prior period, link the change to shifts in supplier coverage, changes in the assessment approach, the severity of issues found, or a different balance between remediation and termination decisions.

Content index entry
GRI 308-2 Negative environmental impacts in the supply chain and actions taken — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre

Preparation tools & forms

Professional preparation tools for GRI 308-2 — 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

ClaimRiskEvidence to check
We based the coverage figure on the suppliers we actually reviewed in the reporting period, using the same inclusion rules throughout and excluding any suppliers outside the agreed boundary.An assurer will test whether the population counted matches the stated boundary, whether any exclusions were justified, and whether the count was calculated consistently rather than adjusted to fit the narrative.Supplier universe extract; boundary and inclusion criteria; assessment list; period cut-off rules; working papers showing how the final count was derived; sign-off from the report owner.
We counted only suppliers for which our review found material environmental concerns, and we kept a clear audit trail showing how each supplier moved from screening to the final tally.An assurer will probe whether the classification of suppliers as material was supported by evidence, applied consistently, and free from double counting or subjective re-labelling.Assessment records; scoring or ranking outputs; reviewer notes; issue logs; evidence of approval for each supplier included in the count; reconciliation between screening results and reported number.
We documented the main environmental issues we found in the supply chain and linked each one back to source evidence, rather than relying on summary statements alone.An assurer will check whether the reported issues are supported by underlying records, whether the description is complete for the chosen scope, and whether any important findings were omitted.Supplier assessments; site visit notes; audit reports; correspondence; incident records; issue register; mapping from each reported issue to source documents.
Where we say follow-up actions were agreed, we can show the specific supplier discussions, the agreed actions, and the basis for including each case in the percentage.An assurer will test whether the numerator is accurate, whether the agreements were real and timely, and whether the calculation uses the correct base of affected suppliers.Action plans; meeting minutes; email confirmations; supplier acknowledgements; calculation workbook; list of affected suppliers used as the denominator; review and approval evidence.
Where we say relationships ended, we have records showing the decision, the timing, and the link between the assessment outcome and the exit from the supplier relationship.An assurer will probe whether terminations were genuinely driven by the assessment outcome, whether the number is complete, and whether the timing aligns with the reported period.Termination notices; procurement or contract records; decision papers; internal approvals; chronology of assessment and exit; supplier master data; reconciliation to the reported percentage.
For any supplier exits we reported, we kept the reasons on file and can distinguish between performance issues, unresolved concerns, and other commercial decisions.An assurer will check whether the stated reasons are supported, whether they are specific enough, and whether the report avoids overstating the link to the assessment where other factors were involved.Exit rationale documents; correspondence with suppliers; internal case notes; contract review papers; procurement approvals; evidence showing how each reason was categorised for reporting.

Evidence pack to prepare

Common reporting gaps

A percentage is stated without the underlying counts (numerator and denominator).The denominator — what the figure is a share of — is not explained.Partial scope is reported as if it were complete coverage.One-off activities are counted as if they were ongoing programmes.Boundary or period changes that move the figure are not flagged.Exclusions from the reported scope are not listed or explained.
Common gaps

Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data

Wrong owner for the data pull
The request goes to the sustainability team alone, even though the supplier assessment, corrective action and exit records sit with procurement, category managers or supplier risk teams.
Using framework language instead of business terms
People ask for the data in disclosure wording rather than the organisation’s own supplier, audit, issue and exit labels, so the right records are missed.
No clear boundary for which suppliers count
The team starts collecting from an undefined supplier population, so direct suppliers, indirect suppliers, or only assessed suppliers get mixed together without a clear rule.
Wrong time basis for the figures
The numbers are pulled from a different reporting period or from the date the issue was found rather than the period used for the report.
Mixing different counting methods
One file counts supplier entities while another counts sites, contracts or assessments, which makes the totals for assessed suppliers and affected suppliers incompatible.
Losing the original source labels
The team copies figures into a summary sheet but drops the source system IDs, case numbers or document names needed to trace each number back.
Combining separate populations
Suppliers with issues, suppliers with agreed improvements and suppliers whose relationship ended are merged into one list, so the percentage fields can no longer be built correctly.
Missing evidence details
The dataset is saved without the audit trail, date stamp, owner name or supporting note that shows where each figure came from and how it was checked.
No sign-off trail
The final numbers are circulated without a named reviewer or approval record, so nobody can show who confirmed the counts before disclosure drafting started.

Where judgement is often needed

Set the supplier universe before counting
State which buying entities, sites and supplier tiers sit inside the review period, and explain any additions or removals from takeovers, disposals or reorganisations so the counts can be read on a like-for-like basis.
Choose one rule where local definitions differ
If countries or business units use different environmental thresholds or labels, pick a single internal rule for identifying material harm, describe it, and note where local practice was normalised to that rule.
Decide how to treat borderline suppliers
Explain whether suppliers just inside or just outside the review scope were included, and set out the practical cut-off used for shared services, agents, distributors or other near-boundary parties.
Fix the timing basis for the assessment
Say whether the figures reflect a point-in-time review, a full-year roll-up or another cut-off, and disclose how late findings, reopened cases or post-period updates were handled.
Separate measured findings from informed estimates
Where direct checks were not possible, identify which figures came from site evidence, audits or other direct sources and which were estimated, and explain the method used to keep the totals consistent.
Explain how grouped reporting affects the numbers
If supplier data were combined for privacy or commercial reasons, disclose the aggregation level used and confirm that the published counts still show the same overall picture without exposing individual suppliers.
Keep percentages aligned to the same base
Use the same supplier set for the assessment count, the improvement share and the exit share, and explain any exclusions so the percentages can be traced back to the underlying population.
State how you handled mixed outcomes
If one supplier had both improvement actions and a decision to end the relationship, describe the rule used to classify it and explain how it was counted in the relevant percentage.
Examples

Illustrative examples

Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.

Illustrative (synthetic) example — Food manufacturing

We reviewed 42 suppliers for environmental risk, and 9 were flagged for material issues. The main concerns were wastewater handling, packaging waste, and energy use; we agreed improvement plans with 78% of the flagged suppliers and ended 22% of those relationships, mainly where repeated non-compliance and refusal to act left no credible route to improvement.

Synthetic example only. It shows how a company might describe the scope of supplier checks, the number of suppliers with material environmental concerns, the main issues found, the share of flagged suppliers where corrective action was agreed, and the share where the relationship ended, with reasons.

Illustrative supplier environmental assessment outcomes (suppliers)
Suppliers reviewed42
Suppliers with material environmental concerns9
Wastewater handling issues4
Packaging waste issues3
Energy use issues2
Other environmental issues0
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Apparel retail

We assessed 60 suppliers and identified 15 with material environmental concerns. The issues were chemical management, water use, and poor waste controls; we agreed improvement actions with 80% of the affected suppliers and ended 20% of those relationships because the suppliers would not commit to a remediation plan or had repeated breaches.

Synthetic example only. It shows how a company might report the number of suppliers checked, the number with material environmental concerns, the main issues identified, the share where improvement actions were agreed, and the share where relationships were ended, including the reasons.

Illustrative supplier environmental assessment outcomes (suppliers)
Suppliers reviewed60
Suppliers with material environmental concerns15
Chemical management issues6
Water use issues5
Waste control issues4
Other environmental issues0
Company reports

How companies report GRI 308-2

Real reports where this topic is disclosed. These are report practice, not exact disclosure templates to copy.

Engie Brasil Energia S.A.
Electric Utilities / IPP / Energy Traders · Brazil · 2025
Open report →
Engie Brasil Energia S.A.'s 2025 sustainability report provides numeric data on suppliers with long-term contracts, those undergoing Tier 1 Due Diligence, and Major Suppliers on page 105, alongside a description of actual and potential significant negative social and environmental impacts identified in the supply chain on page 170. The report also notes that suppliers responsible for over 90% of the company’s supply chain emissions were considered in GHG inventories (p.87), and mentions an assessment conducted by EcoVadis for Major Suppliers (p.106). However, no specific percentage values related to these assessments or impacts were found in the report.
Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited
Retailing · India · 2025
Open report →
Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited’s Integrated Annual Report 2024-25 includes several datapoints related to supplier environmental and social assessments, such as the number of garments with sustainable attributes and suppliers assessed with ESG parameters (p.43), and identification of 38 suppliers with significant actual or potential negative impacts in the supply chain (p.101). The report also discusses negative environmental impacts in the supply chain and related actions (p.106). However, the report does not provide percentage values or detailed narrative explanations regarding the extent or outcomes of these assessments.
WuXi AppTec Co., Ltd.
Pharmaceuticals / Biotech / Life Sciences · China · 2024
Open report →
WuXi AppTec Co., Ltd.'s Environmental, Social and Governance Report 2024 provides numeric data on the number of suppliers and their geographical distribution (p.91, p.85), as well as details on supplier engagement practices such as implementing a CAPA 15 program and providing training for suppliers with improvement potential (p.44). The report also includes narrative information on procurement practices and management of material topics related to sustainable supply chains (p.102). However, the report does not provide percentage values related to supplier engagement or other specific sustainability metrics, and some narrative details on these topics are missing.
✓ LRA AI Assistant · Human-in-the-loop
Dr Ross Kurinko
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 308-2?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 procurement team has reviewed 40 suppliers this year using site visits, questionnaires and audit reports. The review found 6 suppliers with serious environmental issues, and the team agreed improvement plans with 4 of them while ending the relationship with 2.

QHow should you decide what to include in the disclosure so the figures and narrative line up with the review outcome?
Reveal model answer →

A supplier screening exercise covers 18 direct suppliers. Three are flagged for high water use and waste discharge, but only two have signed corrective action plans; the third is still under review and no decision has been made on the relationship.

QWhat should you do when reporting the follow-up actions if one case is unresolved at the reporting date?
Reveal model answer →

A business has identified 5 suppliers with serious land and pollution impacts. It ended contracts with 1 supplier because repeated breaches continued after warnings, and it agreed improvement plans with the other 4.

QHow should the reasons for ending the relationship be described so the disclosure is complete without overstating the case?
Reveal model answer →

A reporting pack shows that 25 suppliers were assessed, 7 were found to have significant environmental harm, and improvement plans were agreed with 5. The draft narrative mentions the 7 suppliers and the 5 plans, but leaves out the number assessed and the two suppliers whose contracts were ended.

QWhat needs to be added or corrected before sign-off so the disclosure gives a full picture of the assessment and response?
Reveal model answer →
Framework references

Related framework references

How this disclosure maps across the major reporting frameworks.

GRI
GRI 308-2
within GRI 308: Supplier Environmental Assessment
Open official source →
Primary
Related & explore
FAQ

Questions this page answers

For GRI 308-2 Supplier Environmental Assessment, what data do I need to gather before I start drafting the disclosure?+
How do I use the step-by-step 'how to prepare' section for GRI 308-2 Supplier Environmental Assessment?+
What should I include in the evidence pack for GRI 308-2 Supplier Environmental Assessment?+
What are the six assurance claims I need to check for GRI 308-2 Supplier Environmental Assessment?+
How do I decide the scope and methodology for the GRI 308-2 Supplier Environmental Assessment datapoints?+
Who should own the data for GRI 308-2 Supplier Environmental Assessment in practice?+
How can I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for GRI 308-2 Supplier Environmental Assessment?+
What does the printable Library Card add for GRI 308-2 Supplier Environmental Assessment?+
How do I turn the GRI 308-2 Supplier Environmental Assessment data into a draft disclosure?+
What are the common reporting gaps or mistakes to avoid in GRI 308-2 Supplier Environmental Assessment?+
Are there example disclosures I can use as a model for GRI 308-2 Supplier Environmental Assessment?+
More questions this page can help with