Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to explain how climate-related risks and opportunities may affect the way its business model works and how value is created across the value chain. In practice, the report should help a reader understand where climate matters most for the organisation’s activities, relationships and dependencies, rather than treating climate as a stand-alone topic.
The practical focus is on breadth and relevance: the explanation should cover the parts of the business and value chain that are actually affected, not just the most visible sites or flagship operations. A useful response shows where impacts are expected, how they connect to operations and upstream or downstream activities, and whether the organisation has considered the full scope of its business model when identifying those effects.
This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official IFRS 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 s2-13 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
Identify where the concentration sits, whether by location, site, or asset class.
Set out what is happening now and what is expected to change later.
Explain how the business model is affected.
Name which parts of the value chain are affected.
How to prepare it
1Set the reporting boundary first: decide which parts of the business, which sites, and which asset classes are in scope for this disclosure, so you are working from one agreed population.
2Define what you will count as a concentration and what you will treat as a shift, using a consistent internal rule so the same facts are grouped the same way across the report.
3Gather the supporting records for each in-scope item, including location-based evidence, site or asset listings, and any internal papers that show how the position has been assessed.
4Prepare the disclosure content by separating the current position from expected future movement, then explain any effects on the business model and identify which parts of the value chain are touched.
5Record any exclusions, assumptions, reclassifications, or changes in method, and explain why they were made so a reviewer can follow the trail from source data to reported text.
6Check the draft against the official source and the underlying evidence, confirming that every required point is covered and that the wording matches the facts without adding or omitting anything.
Request the data
Request the operational impact evidence from site and asset owners
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
What parts of the business, sites, assets and supply chain are already affected, or are expected to be affected, by climate-related change, and how is that showing up in operations and the business model?
Use your organisation’s own operational terms first, then map them to the disclosure. For example, ask for sites, plants, depots, fleets, product lines, service lines, suppliers or routes if those are the words your teams use. Keep the request practical and evidence-led; check the source disclosure wording before sign-off.
Weak request
Please provide the climate-related business model and value chain impact disclosure evidence for the reporting period.
Why it fails: This is too close to framework language and does not tell the owner what operational information to pull. It leaves out the sites, assets, current versus expected changes, and the specific business areas or value chain parts that need to be named, so the response is likely to be incomplete or hard to use.
Better request
Please send the operational evidence for [period] covering the sites, assets, business units and supply chain areas you own that are already affected, or are expected to be affected, by climate-related change. For each item, include the location or asset name, what is happening now, what is expected later, how the business is being affected, which value chain segment is involved, and the source file or system. Use your own internal terms; we will map them after receipt.
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 how the figures were defined, which locations, assets and business segments were included, and whether the numbers reflect the current position, an expected future position, or both.
Context note
Set out what the concentrations mean for the business by linking the numbers to the parts of the model and value chain that are most exposed.
Fluctuation statement
Describe any notable movement by pointing to changes in location, facility mix, asset type or affected business segment, and explain whether the shift is already visible or only expected.
Content index entry
s2-13 Business model and value chain impact — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre
Preparation tools & forms
Professional preparation tools for s2-13 — 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
The information is presented without a date or as-at point.The scope or boundary of the statement is left undefined.Key terms are used inconsistently across the report.Material changes since the previous period are not disclosed.Assertions are made without supporting detail or a source record.Boilerplate is used that does not actually answer what is asked.
Common gaps
Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data
Wrong owner asked
The team sends the request to a policy lead or reporting contact instead of the operational manager who can point to the affected sites, assets, or supply-chain steps.
Framework language used too early
People ask for answers in disclosure terms rather than the organisation’s own operational labels, so the source team cannot map the data back to real activities.
Scope left vague
The request does not pin down which sites, facilities, asset groups, or business lines are in scope, so different teams collect different populations.
Timing basis not fixed
The collector does not state whether the data should reflect the current position or expected changes, so the response mixes present facts with forward-looking assumptions.
Counting basis mixed
One pack combines location counts, facility counts, and asset counts without separating them, which makes the totals impossible to compare or reconcile.
Source labels stripped out
The original system names, site codes, or file references are removed during collation, so the evidence cannot be traced back to the source record.
Separate populations merged
Impacted business activities and affected value-chain steps are rolled into one list, even though they should be kept apart for review.
Evidence metadata missing
The file arrives without date, owner, version, or extraction notes, so no one can tell when it was taken or whether it is the right cut.
No sign-off trail
The draft is circulated without a named reviewer or approval record, so there is no clear trail showing who checked the figures and wording before use.
Where judgement is often needed
Set the cut-off date for the reporting perimeter
Choose one date for the group boundary, explain any acquisitions or disposals included or left out, and keep the same cut-off across the four narrative points unless you clearly flag a different basis.
Handle country-by-country definitions consistently
Where local operating units use different labels or mapping rules for sites, assets or regions, state the rule you used to align them and note any places where the local view was not fully comparable.
Decide how to treat near-boundary populations
If a site, asset, supplier group or customer segment sits close to the scope line, explain the threshold used to include or exclude it and describe any material borderline cases separately.
Separate what is happening now from what is expected later
Use one basis for current conditions and another for expected shifts only if that distinction is clear in your records, and explain the timing assumption behind any forward-looking statement.
State when you used estimates instead of direct counts
If exact figures are not available, say which parts are measured and which are estimated, describe the method used, and make clear where the estimate affects the picture of impacts or affected parts of the chain.
Choose a practical level of aggregation for privacy
When detailed location or workforce information could identify people or sensitive operations, combine the data to a safer level, explain the aggregation rule, and keep enough detail to show the pattern of impact.
Keep geography, facility and asset labels aligned
If one operational issue spans several sites or asset types, explain the classification rule you used so readers can see whether the same issue is counted once or across multiple locations.
Explain any rounding or presentation thresholds
If you round figures or group small items into an 'other' category, disclose the rule used and check that the rounded presentation does not change the overall message about where impacts sit in the business model or chain.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — industrial chemicals
We describe where our exposure is most concentrated and how that profile is changing: 62% of our direct production capacity sits in one coastal region, 24% in a second region, and 14% elsewhere; by asset type, 58% is in large processing plants, 27% in storage and handling sites, and 15% in logistics hubs. The main pressure points are our feedstock sourcing, manufacturing, and outbound distribution, with the coastal sites most exposed to heat stress and storm disruption today, while we expect the inland plants to face a larger share of water-availability constraints over the next planning cycle. These shifts are already influencing our operating model through higher resilience spend, altered inventory buffers, and a gradual move toward more flexible sourcing and production scheduling.
This example shows how to explain where exposure is concentrated, which parts of the business are already affected, and how the pattern is expected to move over time, using internally consistent synthetic figures.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — consumer electronics assembly
Our exposure is concentrated in a small number of assembly and component sites: 47% of output comes from one inland manufacturing cluster, 31% from a coastal cluster, and 22% from smaller satellite facilities; by asset type, 49% is in assembly lines, 33% in component testing and warehousing, and 18% in transport and service assets. At present, the coastal cluster is most affected by flood-related interruptions, while we expect the inland cluster to face more heat and power-supply pressure in future periods. As a result, our business model is shifting toward dual-sourcing, more localised inventory, and a greater share of design-for-resilience work, with the most affected value chain stages being component supply, final assembly, and distribution to customers.
This example demonstrates how to link concentration by location and asset type to both present and expected changes, then connect those changes to the parts of the value chain and operating model that are most affected.
How companies report S2-13 in practice
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. These are report practice, not exact disclosure templates to copy.
Franco-Nevada Corporation
Mining — Rare Minerals / Precious Metals / Gems · Canada · 2025
Franco-Nevada Corporation’s 2025 Sustainability Report provides evidence on current and anticipated financial effects of climate-related risks and opportunities on its financial position, performance, and cash flows (p.55). The report also notes that an asset contributed more than 20% of total 2024 revenues, helping to mitigate operator-specific or localized climate-related risks (p.59). However, there is no quotable evidence regarding concentrations by geography, facility, or asset type, nor descriptions of business model impacts or affected value chain segments.
Yum China Holdings, Inc.
Hotels, Restaurants, Leisure, Tourism Services · China · 2025
Yum China Holdings, Inc.’s 2025 Sustainability Report provides a covered description of how climate-related assessments impact its business model and strategy on page 48. The report includes unclear context regarding concentrations of opportunities by geography, facility, and asset type on page 47, but does not clearly disclose this datapoint. Additionally, there is unclear information about current versus anticipated shifts related to climate risks on page 21, and no evidence was found on value chain segments affected.
WuXi AppTec Co., Ltd.
Pharmaceuticals / Biotech / Life Sciences · China · 2024
WuXi AppTec Co., Ltd.’s Environmental, Social and Governance Report 2024 provides coverage on current and anticipated effects of climate-related risks, particularly in its strategy section on page 94. The report also discusses the organisation’s processes for managing climate-related risks and the integration of these risks into overall risk and opportunity management, as seen on pages 50, 93, 97, and 110. However, the report lacks clear disclosure on the description of business model impacts and does not provide information on concentrations by geography, facility asset type, or affected value chain segments.
✓ LRA AI Assistant · Human-in-the-loop
Ask Study Studio AI assistant about this disclosure
Get practical answers for your reporting context. Your first two answers are free — join LRA Community for free to continue without a limit.
TryHow do I prepare s2-13?What data do I need to collect?Where can I see a real-report example?What mistakes should I avoid?
2 free answers
Check your understanding
Scenarios to work through
A manufacturer has two plants in one coastal region and a warehouse inland. The team has evidence that flood risk is already affecting the coastal sites, while a new supplier rule may affect only the warehouse next year.
QHow should the preparer separate what is happening now from what is expected later, and link each point to the parts of the business that are affected?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑The write-up should clearly distinguish present-day effects from expected future changes, then connect each one to the relevant site or part of the operating chain. In this case, the coastal plants would be described as already affected, while the warehouse would be described as facing a likely later change. The explanation should show which locations or asset groups are involved and avoid blending current and anticipated effects into one undifferentiated statement.
Why this matters · Keep present impacts and expected shifts distinct, and tie each to the relevant location or asset group.
A service group says its model is unchanged overall, but it has moved some work from one country to another and now relies more heavily on a single data centre. The reporting team is unsure whether that counts as a change to the way the business operates.
QWhat should the preparer do when the operating model has not been redesigned, but the way activities are carried out has shifted in practice?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑The explanation should describe the practical effect on how the business works, even if the headline model has not been rewritten. A move in activity between countries and greater dependence on one data centre can be presented as an impact on the operating approach, because it changes how value is created and delivered. The wording should focus on the real operational consequences rather than on whether the formal model name has changed.
Why this matters · Describe the real operational effect, not just whether the formal model label has changed.
A retailer sources most products through three overseas suppliers, but only one supplier region is exposed to water stress. The team has data on the affected sourcing route, yet it has not mapped which downstream distribution steps could also be disrupted.
QWhat level of chain mapping is needed before the preparer can explain which parts of the wider chain are affected?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑The preparer should identify the affected segment or segments with enough clarity to show where the pressure sits in the chain, rather than stopping at a vague reference to the business as a whole. Here, the sourcing route linked to the stressed region is the first affected segment, and any downstream steps should be named only if there is evidence that they are also affected. The disclosure should not overstate reach beyond the evidence available.
Why this matters · Name the affected chain segments precisely, and do not extend the impact beyond the evidence.
A mining group operates several sites across two countries. One site is already facing heat-related downtime, and another site is expected to face similar issues in the next few years; the group also wants to mention that some contractors may be affected indirectly.
QHow should the preparer handle the mix of site-level effects and knock-on effects on other parties when drafting the explanation?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑The response should first identify the sites, facilities or asset classes where the impact is direct and evidenced, using geography where helpful. It can then note any wider knock-on effects on other parts of the chain, including contractors, if those effects are supported by evidence. The key is to keep the direct operational impacts separate from indirect spillovers so the reader can see what is happening now, what may happen later, and where in the chain it sits.
Why this matters · Separate direct site impacts from indirect knock-on effects, and support each with evidence.
Framework references
Related framework references
How this disclosure maps across the major reporting frameworks.
Primary
Related & explore
FAQ
Questions this page answers
For IFRS S2 disclosure s2-13, what data do I need to gather before I start drafting the page?+−
The page says to prepare four main datapoints: location and asset hotspots, present and expected changes, business model effects, and affected chain stages. Use those as the starting checklist before you draft anything.
How do I use the step-by-step preparation section for s2-13 in practice?+−
Use it as a working sequence to move from scoping and data collection into drafting, rather than treating the disclosure as a writing exercise first. The page is designed to help you prepare the disclosure, collect the right data, and turn that into a draft.
What should I ask site owners or asset owners to provide for s2-13 hotspot reporting?+−
Ask for the location and asset hotspot information the page highlights, plus any supporting detail that shows where the relevant hotspots are and why they matter. The page frames this as one of the core datapoints to prepare for the disclosure.
How do I capture present and expected changes for s2-13 without overcomplicating the data request?+−
Keep the request focused on the present and expected changes the page calls out, and make sure the evidence shows both current conditions and what is expected to change. The page is aimed at helping you collect the right data, not building a separate methodology from scratch.
What evidence should I keep in the pack for s2-13 assurance readiness?+−
The page includes an evidence pack with five items for assurance readiness, so you should retain the supporting material that backs the disclosure claims and the underlying data. Use the pack alongside the five assurance claims to verify.
What are the five assurance claims on the s2-13 page and how do I use them?+−
The page says there are five assurance claims to verify, each with a claim, risk and evidence angle. Use them as a check that the disclosure is supported by evidence before it goes into a draft or assurance review.
What are the common reporting gaps or mistakes for s2-13 that I should avoid?+−
The page lists common reporting gaps and mistakes, so use that section as a pre-submission quality check. It is there to help you spot missing data, weak evidence, or a draft that does not line up with the page’s preparation steps.
How can I use the workbook download for s2-13 to manage preparation and assurance?+−
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format, which is intended to support both preparation and assurance readiness. Use it to organise the datapoints, evidence, and review steps before drafting.
What is the printable Library Card PDF for s2-13 useful for?+−
The Download Centre also provides a printable Library Card in PDF format, which is a practical companion to the page content. It can help you keep the disclosure checklist and key prompts to hand while you work through preparation and review.
How do I turn the s2-13 page content into a draft disclosure?+−
Use the draft-output section, which includes visualisation ideas, narrative starters, and a content-index line. That section is designed to help you move from prepared data and evidence into a first draft.
Can I reuse data prepared for ESRS E1 for s2-13, and what should I check?+−
The page says ESRS E1 is the closest correspondence, so the same underlying data may be reusable where it fits the topic. Check the page’s s2-13 datapoints and evidence needs rather than assuming the reporting outputs are identical.
More questions this page can help with
s2-13 IFRS S2 climate-related disclosures what datapoints should I collect firsts2-13 how to prepare the disclosure step by steps2-13 evidence pack what should be included for assurances2-13 assurance claims how do I verify thems2-13 common mistakes and reporting gapss2-13 workbook download how do I use its2-13 printable library card pdf what is it fors2-13 draft output narrative starters and content indexs2-13 synthetic example disclosure how should I read its2-13 location and asset hotspots what data is neededs2-13 present and expected changes how do I evidence thems2-13 affected chain stages what should I ask suppliers or operations teams
How this library is built
312 published reports indexed
63171 pages with page-level citations
247 practitioner guides
Free · LRA Community
Get your s2-13 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 →