Skip to the disclosure focus
Free · Community members
＋ Show 5 more− Show fewer
＋ Show 7 more− Show fewer
Real published reports
Open report →
Open report →
Open report →
✓ LRA AI Assistant · Human-in-the-loop
Open official source →
Explore the IFRS S1 & S2 course →
IFRS S2: Climate-related Disclosures·Paragraphs 25–b
Climate-opportunity processes
Practical guidance for preparing this disclosure. Use this card to identify the information to prepare, verify claims and organise supporting evidence. For exact requirements, always refer to the official IFRS source.
Published passport
Review pending
···
Under review
Editorial review in progress
Prepared from official source material and published report evidence. No named approver is recorded yet, so this page carries no byline.
Use it alongside the official IFRS source while that review is in progress.
Standard
IFRS S2: Climate-related Disclosures
Paragraphs 25–b · 2024
Last reviewed
—
LRA educational guidance · Not issued or endorsed by IFRS
To prepare this disclosure
Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to explain the processes it uses to identify, assess and manage climate-related opportunities. In practice, that means describing how opportunity work is built into decision-making, who is involved, what information is used, and how the organisation keeps track of opportunities over time. The focus is on the actual management process, not just a list of hoped-for benefits.
The practical question is whether this applies only to a few headline projects or is embedded across the business. A useful explanation would show the scope of coverage across operations, business units, geographies and stages of the value chain, and make clear whether the process is used consistently or only for selected sites or initiatives.
This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official IFRS source.
Before you start
Before you start
A quick mental checklist before you prepare this disclosure — tick each as you settle it.
Preparation
Key information to prepare
| Preparation field | What to capture | Evidence hint | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strategy linkage | A plain description of how the opportunity or issue is connected to the organisation’s strategic plan, including where that connection is reflected in planning documents or decision-making. | Strategy papers, business plans, board packs, or planning documents showing the link. | Strategy / Corporate planning |
| Tracking and review | How the organisation tracks the matter over time and how often it is reviewed, including the main checks, updates, and escalation route used in practice. | Monitoring dashboards, review meeting minutes, management reports, or action logs. | Risk / Performance management |
| Opportunity spotting process | The process used to find and record opportunities, including who looks for them, what inputs are used, and how items are captured for assessment. | Process maps, workshop notes, registers, intake forms, or internal guidance. | Risk / Strategy / Business development |
| Ranking rules | The rules or factors used to rank items against each other, including the criteria applied and how the organisation decides what comes first. | Scoring matrices, assessment templates, policy notes, or committee papers. | Risk / Strategy / Finance |
| Scenario analysis use | Where and how scenario analysis is used in the organisation, including the decisions, planning, or risk work it informs and the main assumptions considered. | Scenario models, planning papers, risk assessments, or board materials. | Strategy / Risk / Finance |
＋ Show s2-25-b sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
Show how the issue feeds into strategy and planning decisions.
Track progress and revisit the matter regularly.
Use a process to spot opportunities.
Apply criteria to rank what matters most.
Use scenarios where helpful to test possible futures.
How to prepare it
Start by pinning down the exact planning link you will describe, so the disclosure sits clearly inside the organisation’s wider strategy work rather than as a stand-alone note.
Set out the practical method used to spot opportunities, including how the business looks for them and what triggers them to be considered in the first place.
Define the rules you use to rank those opportunities, and make sure the basis for comparing and ordering them is written down in a way others can follow.
Gather the supporting material that shows how scenario analysis is used in the process, with enough detail to explain where it fits and what it informs.
Compile the evidence that shows the process is monitored and checked over time, including any internal review records or management oversight notes that support the narrative.
Before finalising, compare your draft against the official source, then record any exclusions, wording changes, or scope decisions so the published text can be traced back to the underlying material.
Request the data
Request the climate opportunity process evidence from Strategy
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
How do we identify, assess, prioritise, monitor and review climate-related opportunities, and how is that work connected to strategic planning?
Use your organisation’s own names for the relevant process, planning forum, review cycle and scenario work first, then map them back to the disclosure points. Keep the request in business language that the owner already uses, and check the official source before sign-off.
Weak request
Please provide the climate-opportunity process disclosure evidence for IFRS S2 25(b), including the identification process, prioritisation criteria, scenario use, monitoring and review, and linkage to strategic planning.
Why it fails: This uses framework language that many business owners will not recognise, so it is harder for them to find the right material quickly. It also sounds like a compliance checklist rather than a request for the organisation’s own planning and review evidence.
Better request
Please send the latest strategy and planning materials for [reporting period] that show how your team spots climate-related opportunities, decides which ones matter most, checks progress, and uses scenario work where relevant. If your team uses different names for these steps, use those names and add a short note so we can map them back.
Formal email template
Subject: Request for climate opportunity process evidence for [reporting period] Hi [name], We are preparing the sustainability reporting pack and need your help with the evidence for the climate opportunity process area. Please share the materials that show: - how opportunity work is linked into strategic planning; - how the process is monitored and reviewed; - how opportunities are identified; - what criteria are used to prioritise them; and - how scenario work is used, if applicable. Please include the latest version for [reporting period], plus any supporting notes, slides, meeting papers, or approvals that explain the process in your team’s own terms. If there are different names for these activities in your area, please use those names and add a short note so we can map them back correctly. A possible LRA training template only — please adapt this to your organisation and check the official source before sign-off. Thanks, [preparer name]
Short Teams / Slack version
Hi [name] — could you send over the latest strategy/planning materials that show how climate opportunities are identified, ranked, reviewed and linked into planning for [reporting period]? Please include any scenario pack or review notes you use. Use your team’s own terms if they differ. Thanks.
Industry examples
Manufacturing
Context. A group strategy team runs annual planning and capital allocation reviews for plant upgrades and product development.
Adapted request. Please share the planning papers and review notes for [reporting period] that show how climate-related upside is identified in product, plant and supply chain planning, how it is ranked, how it is tracked through the year, and how any scenario work feeds into the annual plan.
Example response. Attached: annual strategy deck, capital allocation paper, quarterly review minutes, and a scenario workshop summary. Internal labels used: efficiency upside, low-carbon product growth, and resilience gains.
Retail
Context. A commercial planning team reviews store format, sourcing and customer proposition opportunities each quarter.
Adapted request. Please provide the latest commercial planning pack for [reporting period] showing how climate-related opportunities are spotted in sourcing, store operations and customer offers, how they are prioritised, how they are reviewed, and whether scenario analysis is used in the planning cycle.
Example response. Attached: quarterly commercial pack, sourcing review note, store format roadmap, and scenario assumptions sheet. Internal labels used: customer demand shift, lower-cost energy actions, and supplier mix changes.
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
We describe the basis used to identify, screen and rank climate-related opportunities, including how the process links into strategic planning, what criteria are applied, how often it is reviewed and where scenario analysis is used.
Context note
This tells readers how the organisation turns climate-related opportunity signals into business decisions, showing whether the approach is embedded in planning and how consistently it is applied.
Fluctuation statement
If the process changed during the period, explain whether that was due to a refresh of planning inputs, a revised set of ranking criteria, a different review cadence or a broader use of scenario analysis.
Content index entry
s2-25-b Climate-opportunity processes — [location / page] / [notes]Download Centre
Preparation tools & forms
Professional preparation tools for s2-25-b — 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.
Assurance readiness
For each claim, check the evidence
| Claim | Risk | Evidence to check |
|---|---|---|
| We show how the coverage figure was built from the planning work we used internally, so the reader can see the link between the number and our strategy process. | The assurer may test whether the figure is genuinely derived from the planning process, or whether the link is only asserted without a clear trail from source material to the published number. | Board or management planning papers, strategy decks, working papers showing how the figure was assembled, sign-off notes, and any cross-reference between the published figure and the internal planning cycle. |
| We kept this section focused on the opportunity process itself and did not repeat the same process details elsewhere in the report without need. | The assurer may look for duplicated or inconsistent descriptions across sections, which can create confusion about which explanation is authoritative. | Drafts of the report, cross-references between sections, editorial review notes, and a check showing where the same process content appears and why it was not repeated. |
| We explain the steps we used to spot possible climate-related upside and to judge which ones were worth taking forward. | The assurer may probe whether the description is too high level, or whether the organisation can evidence a real process rather than a generic statement. | Process maps, workshop notes, opportunity registers, assessment templates, and records showing how ideas were screened and evaluated. |
| We describe how we keep the coverage figure under review after publication, including who checks it and when updates are considered. | The assurer may ask whether there is an actual monitoring routine, whether it is followed consistently, and whether changes are captured in a controlled way. | Monitoring schedules, review meeting minutes, update logs, version control records, and evidence of assigned owners for ongoing review. |
| We explain the method we use to identify possible climate-related upside and the way we assess it before it is included in the disclosure. | The assurer may test whether the identification and assessment steps are distinct, documented, and applied consistently across the items included. | Method statements, assessment criteria, scoring sheets, opportunity pipeline records, and evidence that the method was applied to the disclosed items. |
| We set out the criteria we used to rank the opportunities, so the reader can see why some items were treated as more important than others. | The assurer may challenge whether the ranking rules were defined in advance, applied consistently, and supported by evidence rather than judgement alone. | Prioritisation framework, weighting or scoring rules, decision papers, ranking outputs, and approvals showing how the final order or emphasis was reached. |
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 ownerThe request goes to the sustainability team alone, even though the evidence sits with strategy, risk, finance or the business unit that actually runs the process.
Framework language onlyPeople ask for answers in disclosure terms instead of the organisation’s own process names, so teams cannot match the request to their day-to-day records.
Scope left vagueThe data pull does not say which business lines, regions, subsidiaries or time period are in scope, so different teams send different populations.
Wrong timing basisThe team mixes current-year activity with forward-looking planning or a different reporting cut-off, which makes the process record inconsistent.
Counting bases mixedOne source is counted by number of reviews, another by number of projects or people, and the final pack combines them as if they were the same measure.
Source labels lostOriginal file names, system tags or document titles are stripped out during collation, so reviewers cannot trace each line back to the source record.
Separate groups mergedOpportunity work for different units, products or regions is rolled into one total even though the underlying process and owner are not the same.
Evidence trail missingThe pack contains the answer but not the supporting note, date, version history or sign-off record, so no one can show how the figure was checked.
Where judgement is often needed
Acquisitions and disposals during the reporting periodSet a clear cut-off for which business units sit inside the process description this period, and explain any additions or removals caused by buying, selling, or closing operations.
Different country practices for the same process stepWhere local teams use different names or methods for the same activity, describe the common group-wide approach and note any country-specific variations that affect how the process works in practice.
Teams or assets close to the inclusion lineState how you treat operations, projects, or staff that sit near the boundary of the process, and explain the rule used to decide whether they are included or left out.
Choosing the timing basis for the descriptionIf the process has changed during the year, make clear whether the disclosure reflects the position at period end, an average view, or another chosen timing basis, and explain why that basis was used.
Using estimates where direct records are incompleteWhen the process description relies partly on management judgement or estimates, identify which parts are estimated, what evidence supports them, and how you distinguish them from directly observed information.
Rounding and level of detailApply a consistent rounding approach and explain it if it could affect interpretation, especially where small differences might change how the process is understood.
Protecting sensitive information through groupingIf naming a team, site, or market would expose confidential or personal information, group the information at a higher level and say how the grouping still gives a fair picture of the process.
Linking the process to planning, review, and scenario workWhere the process feeds into planning, oversight, or scenario analysis, explain the practical link in your own operating language and make clear which parts are used for each purpose.
Prioritisation rules when opportunities competeIf more than one opportunity could be taken forward, describe the criteria used to rank them and note any judgement calls where similar opportunities were treated differently.
Updating the process after a review cycleIf monitoring leads to changes in how opportunities are identified or assessed, explain what changed, when it changed, and whether the revised approach was applied only prospectively or also to earlier periods.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Electricity generation
We fold climate-related opportunities into our three-year plan by testing how efficiency gains, grid flexibility and lower-carbon power sales could affect revenue, capital spend and delivery timing.
- Each quarter, management refreshes the register of possible upside cases, ranks them against expected value, ease of delivery, timing and fit with our risk appetite, and then decides which ones move into the plan.
- We test the shortlist against two internal climate pathways and a high-warming case, using the results to check whether our assumptions, investment choices and milestone dates still make sense.
This example shows how a utility might connect opportunity work to planning, review it regularly, rank ideas using clear business filters, and use climate pathways to challenge assumptions.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Food processing
We use climate-related upside screening to shape our medium-term plan, especially where heat, water stress and changing consumer demand could create new product or efficiency gains.
- Our team reviews the pipeline every half-year, scoring each idea on margin impact, implementation effort, customer demand, resilience benefit and how quickly it could be delivered, so only the strongest cases progress.
- We then compare the selected actions with a low-disruption and a severe-disruption climate path to see whether the timing, spend profile and expected returns still hold up.
This example shows how a manufacturer could link opportunity work to strategy, keep it under periodic review, apply practical ranking criteria, and use scenarios to test whether the chosen actions remain credible.
Company reports
How companies report S2-25-b in practice
Examples of full and partial reporting practice. These are evidence-led reviews, not exact disclosure templates to copy.
Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co.,Ltd.
Construction and Engineering · South Korea · 2025
Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co.,Ltd.'s 2025 Sustainability Report provides a covered disclosure on the monitoring and review of climate-related risks and opportunities, detailing oversight mechanisms and management controls on page 140. The report includes related context on the processes used to identify, assess, and prioritize sustainability-related risks, but these disclosures are unclear and not fully detailed on page 139. Notably, the report does not provide clear information on the opportunity identification process or the use of scenarios for climate-related risk management.
ANZ Group Holdings
None · Australia · 2025
ANZ Group Holdings’ 2025 Climate Report provides covered disclosure on the use of climate scenario analysis, outlining its approach on page 59 and referencing specific scenarios such as the NGFS Current Policies Hot House World on page 27. The report also includes related context on the integration of climate-related risks and opportunities within its strategy and risk management processes (p.57), as well as on processes for identifying, assessing, prioritising, and monitoring nature-related dependencies and risks (p.58), though these are not clearly disclosed. Notably, there is no clear disclosure on prioritisation criteria, and the opportunity identification process is only partially addressed with unclear detail (p.90).
Brambles Limited
Solid Waste Management Utilities · Australia · 2025
Brambles Limited’s FY25 Annual Report provides clear coverage of its prioritisation criteria for climate-related risks and opportunities, detailing processes to identify, assess, prioritise, and monitor these factors and their integration into broader risk management (p.83). The report also references climate-related scenario analysis informing risk and opportunity identification, though the disclosure lacks clarity on the specific use of scenarios in strategic planning (pp.82-83). Notably, there is no explicit evidence on the company’s monitoring and review procedures or the opportunity identification process within the report.
Ask the 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.
Try
How do I prepare s2-25-b?
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 a climate-opportunity register, but the finance team says it is only a sustainability file and never feeds into the three-year plan. The operations director wants to keep it separate because the business plan is already signed off.
QShould the write-up show a clear connection between the opportunity process and the organisation’s planning work, or can it be presented as a standalone exercise?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑
It should show how the opportunity work informs planning decisions, not sit apart as a side list. A reader should be able to see where the findings influence targets, investment choices, or other planning steps, even if the process is run by a separate team.
Why this matters · Explain how climate-opportunity work feeds into business planning, rather than describing it as an isolated activity.
A retailer reviews its opportunity pipeline once a year for the annual report, but the commercial team also updates it after major market shifts and new policy signals. The draft disclosure only mentions the year-end review.
QWhat level of detail is needed about how the organisation checks and updates its opportunity process?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑
The disclosure should reflect the real pattern of checking and updating, including any regular reviews and any extra reassessments when circumstances change. If the process is refreshed more than once a year, the description should not imply a single annual look-back only.
Why this matters · Describe the actual review rhythm and any trigger points for re-checking the process.
An energy company has a spreadsheet of possible climate-related upside cases, but the team cannot explain how items first enter the list or who decides whether a new idea is worth tracking. The draft text says only that opportunities are ‘considered as they arise’.
QWhat should the preparer clarify about the way opportunities are found and screened?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑
The disclosure should set out the practical route from idea to tracked opportunity: how potential upside is spotted, who assesses it, and what steps move it into the pipeline. A vague statement that opportunities are noticed informally is not enough if the organisation has a more defined method.
Why this matters · Show the route from spotting a possible upside to deciding whether it enters the formal process.
A food producer ranks climate opportunities using expected margin uplift, implementation effort, and fit with existing capital plans. The sustainability team also ran a scenario exercise, but the draft disclosure does not say how those scenarios affected the ranking.
QHow should the organisation explain the way it decides which opportunities matter most, and where scenario analysis fits in?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑
It should explain the factors used to sort and compare opportunities, and it should show how scenario work informs that judgement if it is part of the method. The reader needs to understand the basis for prioritisation, not just see a list of selected opportunities.
Why this matters · State the criteria used to rank opportunities and make clear how scenario analysis supports that ranking.
Framework references
Relevant IFRS / ISSB requirements and related disclosures
Available framework references and nearby disclosures relevant to preparing this requirement.
IFRS / ISSB
s2-25-b
within IFRS S2: Climate-related Disclosures
Related & explore
Climate-related risks and opportunities → CardIdentification inputs and industry topics → CardObjective →Business model and value chain impact → CardStrategy response and transition plan → Card
Browse all disclosures →
More in IFRS S2 → Browse full catalogue → Disclosure Library home → Search all disclosures →
FAQ
Questions this page answers
How do I use the s2-25-b page to draft the disclosure from scratch?+−
Start with the plain-language explainer and the step-by-step how to prepare section, then use the datapoints, example disclosures and draft-output section to turn your notes into a first draft. The page is set up as practitioner guidance, so it is meant to help you prepare the disclosure rather than act as an official source.
What data do I need to collect for s2-25-b before I start writing?+−
The page says to prepare data for strategy linkage, tracking and review, opportunity spotting process, ranking rules and scenario analysis use. Collect those inputs first so you can build a complete draft and avoid gaps later.
How should I decide the scope and method for the s2-25-b disclosure?+−
Use the page’s step-by-step preparation guidance and the datapoints list to set what you are covering and how you will describe it. The scenario analysis use item is especially useful for checking that your method is clear and consistent in the draft.
Who should own the s2-25-b data and narrative in practice?+−
The page does not assign roles, but it is designed for sustainability/ESG managers, HR or data owners, and assurance reviewers to work from the same material. In practice, use the workbook and evidence pack to make ownership and review points clear within your team.
What should go into the evidence pack for s2-25-b assurance readiness?+−
The page includes an evidence pack with five items and six assurance claims to verify, each framed around claim, risk and evidence. Use those together so you can show where the disclosure came from and what supports it.
What are the common mistakes to avoid when preparing s2-25-b?+−
The page has a section on common reporting gaps and mistakes, so use that as a checklist before you finalise the draft. It is there to help you spot missing data, weak explanations and other avoidable issues early.
How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for s2-25-b?+−
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format, which is intended to support preparation and assurance readiness. Use it alongside the page’s datapoints, evidence pack and example disclosures to organise your working papers.
What can I learn from the synthetic example disclosures for s2-25-b?+−
The page includes synthetic illustrative examples, including a quantitative table where relevant, so you can see how the disclosure might look in practice. Treat them as examples only and adapt the structure and wording to your own data.
Can I reuse data from an ESRS E1 climate disclosure for s2-25-b?+−
The page notes ESRS E1 as the closest correspondence, so the same underlying data may be reusable where it fits your reporting set-up. Do not assume the disclosures are identical; use the page to check how your existing material can be adapted.
How do I turn the s2-25-b data into a draft narrative and visuals?+−
The draft-output section gives visualisation ideas, narrative starters and a content-index line to help you assemble the final text. Use those prompts to convert your prepared data into a clear draft that is easy to review and evidence.
More questions this page can help with
s2-25-b disclosure checklist for sustainability managers2-25-b data points strategy linkage tracking and review opportunity spotting process ranking rules scenario analysis usehow to prepare s2-25-b climate-related disclosures workbooks2-25-b evidence pack assurance readinesss2-25-b common reporting gaps mistakess2-25-b synthetic example disclosure tables2-25-b narrative starters content index lines2-25-b printable library card pdfs2-25-b from company reports examplesESRS E1 closest correspondence s2-25-b reusable datas2-25-b assurance claims claim risk evidences2-25-b plain-language explainer practitioner guidance
Go deeper · s2-25-b
Learn to prepare this disclosure end-to-end
This guide covers one requirement. The IFRS S1 & S2 Reporting course walks the full ISSB workflow — governance, strategy, risk management and metrics — with exercises on your own data.
Available as Guided Flex, Live Cohort, 1:1 Expert Mentorship or Corporate Programme.
How this library is built
312 published reports indexed
63,171 pages with page-level citations
272 practitioner-built Disclosure Cards
/en/knowledge-hub/disclosure-cards/s2-25-b/
Free · LRA Community
Get your s2-25-b 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 →