Short answer
The answer, before the reasoning
IFRS S1/S2 and the GRI Standards answer different but complementary reporting questions. IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards provide primary users of general purpose financial reports with material information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could affect the entity’s prospects.
GRI enables an organisation to report its most significant impacts on the economy, environment and people, including human rights impacts, for a wide range of information users. One report can use both systems efficiently, but it must keep the materiality processes, disclosure architecture and statements of use or compliance transparent. Shared data can be reused only after checking definitions, boundaries, methods and the distinct purpose each disclosure serves.
A practical comparison of the distinct but complementary IFRS investor lens and GRI impact lens, with a controlled architecture for presenting both in one report.
In practice
Article map
| Stage | What the reader will be able to do |
|---|---|
| Answer | State the distinct but complementary purposes and reject automatic equivalence. |
| Compare | Distinguish users, materiality, impacts, architecture, sector guidance, boundaries and claims. |
| Reuse | Identify common data and evidence while documenting residual differences. |
| Present | Design one report with two transparent lenses, indexes and statements. |
| Govern | Control assurance wording, framework claims, mappings and updates. |
Why organisations confuse the two systems
A climate, workforce, water or biodiversity issue can appear in both an IFRS sustainability-related financial disclosure and a GRI report. This creates a strong opportunity to reuse data and evidence. It also creates a common error: the team assumes that one materiality assessment, one metric and one narrative automatically satisfy both sets of Standards. The overlap is real, but the reporting objectives remain distinct.
The 2026 joint statement from the IFRS Foundation and GRI describes the systems as distinct but complementary. Common disclosures can reduce duplication when the same information is relevant to both purposes. Complementary disclosures remain necessary where impact information is important to stakeholders but is not material under IFRS, or where an external climate or nature risk affects the entity’s prospects without arising from the entity’s own impact.
IFRS investor lens and GRI impact lens
The two systems overlap where significant impacts are also relevant to understanding sustainability-related risks and opportunities, but neither lens subsumes the other.
In practice
Quick comparison
| Dimension | IFRS S1 and S2 | GRI Standards — Practical consequence |
|---|---|---|
| Primary purpose | Sustainability-related financial information useful to investors, lenders and other creditors. | Information about the organisation’s most significant impacts on economy, environment and people, including human rights. — Define both reporting objectives before designing the report. |
| Primary audience | Primary users of general purpose financial reports. | A wide range of stakeholders and other information users, including investors, employees, communities, civil society, policymakers and others. — A stakeholder-relevant impact is not automatically IFRS-material; investor information is not automatically a complete impact account. |
| Materiality object | Material information about risks and opportunities that could reasonably affect the entity’s prospects. | Material topics representing the organisation’s most significant impacts. — Maintain linked but separate risk/opportunity and impact registers. |
| Impact role | Impacts are relevant when they give rise to or inform material risks and opportunities for the entity. | Actual and potential, negative and positive impacts are the core reporting object. — Do not exclude an impact from GRI only because a financial effect is unproven. |
| Architecture | IFRS S1 general requirements; IFRS S2 climate; industry-based information and SASB refer-and-consider process; entity-specific information. | Universal Standards, applicable Sector Standards and Topic Standards. — Map at disclosure level; the same topic label can hide different requirements. |
| Sector layer | SASB disclosure topics and metrics support industry-based investor information. | GRI Sector Standards identify topics likely to be material and relevant disclosures for sector impacts. — SASB and GRI Sector Standards are not substitutes for one another. |
| Reporting entity / reach | Same reporting entity as financial statements; risk/opportunity and metric-specific value-chain scope. | The reporting organisation and its impacts through activities and business relationships; GRI recommends alignment with financial-reporting group where possible. — Use a common legal-entity base but document impact and metric boundaries separately. |
| Reporting claim | Explicit and unreserved compliance statement only when all IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards requirements are met. | “In accordance” only when all nine GRI 1 requirements are met; “with reference” has a separate three-requirement route. — Approve and display each claim separately. |
| Assurance | No universal assurance mandate in IFRS S1/S2; a jurisdiction may require it. | GRI recommends seeking external assurance and requires disclosure of assurance policy/practice, but external assurance is not one of the nine universal in-accordance requirements. — Describe actual assurance scope rather than implying a framework-wide certificate. |
1. Primary users and the decision question
IFRS S1 asks what material sustainability-related financial information primary users need when deciding whether to provide resources to the entity. The focus is on risks and opportunities that could affect cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital. This can include information about dependencies and impacts, but only in so far as it is material to the IFRS reporting objective.
GRI starts from the organisation’s impacts on the economy, environment and people. The Standards are designed for a broad range of information users. An investor may be one of those users, but GRI is not limited to information that changes an investor’s resource-allocation decision. The organisation reports material topics based on the significance of its impacts and explains how it manages them.
Rule
REPLACEMENT MENTAL MODEL
Do not label IFRS as “financial data” and GRI as “non-financial data”. Both can contain qualitative and quantitative information, financial consequences and governance disclosures. The more accurate distinction is sustainability-related financial risks and opportunities for primary users versus the organisation’s significant impacts for a broad range of information users.
2. Materiality: risks and opportunities versus significant impacts
How an impact can connect to IFRS information
A significant impact can create regulatory, legal, operational, reputational, market, financing or other effects for the entity. For example, severe water impacts can lead to permit restrictions, community conflict, remediation costs or reduced access to a resource. Those consequences can create a sustainability-related risk that is material under IFRS S1. The team should document the connection rather than assume it.
How an IFRS risk can exist without a caused impact
An entity can be exposed to a material physical climate risk, biodiversity dependency, workforce-skill shortage or regulatory transition even when the risk is not caused by a significant impact of the same kind. IFRS S1/S2 can require disclosure because the risk affects prospects. GRI impact reporting asks a different question and may produce a different material-topic conclusion.
In practice
| Decision step | IFRS S1/S2 | GRI — Connection control |
|---|---|---|
| Identify the universe | Risks and opportunities that could reasonably affect prospects, informed by the value chain, industry and other sources. | Actual and potential, negative and positive impacts across activities and business relationships. — One issue inventory can hold both, with a field identifying risk, opportunity, impact or several relationships. |
| Assess significance/materiality | Could omission, misstatement or obscuring influence primary-user decisions? | Which impacts are most significant, considering applicable GRI guidance and sector context? — Separate criteria, thresholds, rationale and approvers. |
| Determine topic/disclosure output | Disclose material information about each risk or opportunity, including applicable industry-based metrics. | Determine material topics and report GRI 3 disclosures plus applicable Topic Standard disclosures and Sector Standard references. — Use framework-specific disclosure matrices linked to common issue IDs. |
| Reassess | Reassess materiality each reporting date and value-chain scope on significant change. | Update the determination of material topics when impacts, activities, business relationships or context change. — One trigger log can route the issue to both assessments. |
Rule
NON-EQUIVALENCE RULE
A topic appearing in both reports does not prove that the materiality conclusion, boundary, metric or narrative is the same. Map the exact disclosure requirement and purpose, then record what can be reused and what must be added or adjusted.
3. Content architecture and sector guidance
IFRS S1 provides the general requirements and core content across governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets. IFRS S2 adds climate-specific requirements. In the absence of a dedicated IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard for another risk or opportunity, the entity applies judgement and must refer to and consider SASB disclosure topics and metrics. The entity discloses which sources and industries it applied.
GRI uses three interrelated series. The Universal Standards apply to all organisations reporting in accordance. Applicable Sector Standards provide context on topics likely to be material in the sector and related disclosures. Topic Standards contain disclosures for reporting on particular impacts. GRI Sector Standards inform the process; they do not automatically make every listed topic material. The organisation considers the topics and explains those determined not material as required by GRI 1 and the applicable Sector Standard process.
In practice
| Layer | IFRS / SASB role | GRI role — Do not confuse |
|---|---|---|
| General foundation | IFRS S1: conceptual foundations, core content, presentation, judgements, estimates and claim. | GRI 1–3: system, reporting requirements, general disclosures and material-topic process. — A complete GRI Universal layer is not equivalent to IFRS S1. |
| Topic standard | IFRS S2 currently provides dedicated climate requirements. | GRI Topic Standards cover a broad range of impact topics. — A shared topic name does not imply the same objective or disclosures. |
| Industry / sector | SASB topics and metrics are considered for industry-based investor information. | GRI Sector Standards address likely sector impacts and reporting expectations. — SASB metric selection does not replace use of an applicable GRI Sector Standard, or vice versa. |
| Entity-specific layer | Additional information and entity-specific metrics may be needed for fair presentation. | Organisation-specific information may be needed to explain impacts and management where Topic Standards are insufficient. — An entity-specific metric needs a controlled definition and framework-purpose note. |
4. Reporting entity, value chain and metric boundaries
IFRS S1 requires sustainability-related financial disclosures for the same reporting entity as the related financial statements. GRI can be used by any organisation and focuses on impacts through its activities and business relationships; GRI 1 recommends aligning the group of entities and timing with financial reporting where possible. These points enable a common base perimeter, but the impact and metric boundaries must still be designed for the applicable requirement.
In practice
| Boundary question | IFRS check | GRI check — Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Which legal entities form the reporting entity? | Reconcile to the consolidated financial statements. | Define the reporting organisation and group entities; explain differences where relevant. — Legal/consolidation structure and boundary memo. |
| Which business relationships matter? | Include value-chain information relevant to material risks and opportunities. | Identify impacts through activities and business relationships, including where the organisation is directly linked. — Value-chain map, due-diligence records and relationship analysis. |
| Which metric boundary applies? | Apply IFRS S2 or entity-specific metric rules; explain methodology and boundary. | Apply the relevant Topic Standard and Sector Standard references. — Metric dictionary, method, population and boundary bridge. |
| What period is used? | Same period and timing as financial statements, subject to specific transition reliefs. | State reporting period; alignment with financial reporting is recommended where possible. — Reporting calendar and cut-off policy. |
5. What data can be shared—and what still changes
The strongest efficiency comes from a controlled master dataset rather than from copying finished disclosures. Each data field should have a common technical definition where possible, followed by framework-specific attributes: reporting objective, materiality conclusion, boundary, disaggregation, methodology, required context, evidence and claim. The table below illustrates typical reuse decisions; it is not a universal crosswalk.
In practice
| Data area | Potential shared core | IFRS-specific review — GRI-specific review |
|---|---|---|
| GHG emissions | Activity data, factors, organisational inventory, Scope 1–3 totals and evidence. | IFRS S2 boundary, Scope 2 presentation, industry metrics, financed emissions, investor-material context and 2025 amendments. — Applicable GRI climate disclosures, impact context, transition-plan impacts, Topic/Sector requirements and statement of use. |
| Energy | Consumption, fuel, electricity, renewable instruments and sites. | Connection to climate risks/opportunities, targets and financial effects. — Energy-impact disclosures under applicable GRI Standards and sector context. |
| Water | Withdrawals, consumption, discharge, basin, quality and facility data. | Material risks/opportunities, concentration in value chain and effects on prospects. — Significant water impacts, affected stakeholders, management approach and applicable Topic disclosures. |
| Workforce | Headcount, turnover, injury, training and demographic data. | Human-capital risks/opportunities and industry metrics material to primary users. — Impacts on workers, human rights, employment practices and Topic/Sector disclosures. |
| Biodiversity / nature | Locations, dependencies, impacts, ecosystem data and action plans. | Risks/opportunities affecting prospects and entity-specific metrics pending future ISSB work. — Material biodiversity impacts and applicable GRI 101 requirements. |
| Targets and actions | Target register, baseline, boundary, progress, resources and approvals. | Performance in relation to material risks/opportunities and financial planning. — Management of significant impacts, actions, effectiveness and impact outcomes. |
Rule
DATA REUSE TEST
Reuse a field only after answering five questions: same definition? same boundary? same period? same methodology? same disclosure purpose and context? A “no” does not prevent reuse; it means the transformation and residual difference must be controlled and disclosed where relevant.
6. Statements of compliance, use and assurance
The reporting claims are structurally different. IFRS S1 requires an explicit and unreserved statement of compliance only when the sustainability-related financial disclosures comply with all IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards requirements. Selected metrics, a climate-only pilot outside the permitted transition relief, or use of SASB Standards does not by itself support that statement.
GRI 1 provides two distinct routes. To report in accordance with the GRI Standards, the organisation must comply with all nine requirements, including the reporting principles, GRI 2 disclosures, determination of material topics, use of applicable Sector Standards, reporting on material topics, permitted omissions, a GRI content index, the statement of use and notification to GRI. An organisation using selected GRI content can instead report with reference to the GRI Standards if it complies with the three requirements for that route. These are not informal marketing labels.
GRI recommends that organisations seek external assurance and requires disclosure of the policy and practice for seeking assurance. However, external assurance is not itself one of the nine universal requirements for the “in accordance” statement. IFRS S1/S2 likewise do not impose universal assurance. The actual requirement and the conclusion depend on law, listing rules, contract and the assurance engagement.
In practice
| Public wording | Technical meaning | Required control |
|---|---|---|
| Explicit and unreserved IFRS compliance | All applicable IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards requirements are met. | Framework checklist, materiality sign-off, relief review, connected-information review and authorised claim approval. |
| GRI “in accordance” statement | All nine GRI 1 in-accordance requirements are met for the stated period. | GRI requirements checklist, content index, omissions review, Sector Standard use and notification record. |
| GRI “with reference” statement | Selected GRI information is reported under the separate three-requirement route. | Correct content index, statement of use and notification. |
| “Assured” | An independent engagement covers a defined subject matter against stated criteria at a stated assurance level. | Assurance report, scope bridge, exclusions and precise cross-reference. |
| “Integrated / combined report” | A presentation format, not a substitute for either framework’s claim. | Basis of preparation separating objectives, materiality, content and claims. |
How one report can present both lenses transparently
One report, two transparent reporting lenses
A combined report can use a shared evidence and data core, provided the IFRS investor lens and GRI impact lens remain clearly identified through separate materiality decisions, mappings, indexes and claims.
In practice
| Stage | Action | Output / control |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Define the two reporting objectives | Write a reporting policy that states who each layer serves, what materiality question it answers and which claims are intended. | Approved basis-of-preparation design; prohibited blended claim wording. |
| 2. Establish the base organisation and period | Reconcile legal entities, financial consolidation, reporting period, acquisitions and disposals. | Common perimeter bridge plus documented GRI/metric differences. |
| 3. Build a connected issue universe | Combine impact, risk, opportunity, dependency, stakeholder, due-diligence, sector and scientific inputs under stable issue IDs. | Impact–risk relationship map without automatic equivalence. |
| 4. Run separate materiality decisions | Determine GRI material topics based on significant impacts and IFRS material information about risks/opportunities for primary users. | Two decision registers with linked issues, rationale, evidence and approval. |
| 5. Build the master data and evidence core | Define source, unit, boundary, period, method, estimate, owner, reviewer and evidence for each shared field. | Data dictionary, evidence register and residual-gap flags. |
| 6. Draft two clearly identified disclosure layers | Use common governance and contextual content where appropriate; provide framework-specific impact, risk/opportunity, metric and management information. | Report architecture that does not obscure material IFRS information or GRI disclosures. |
| 7. Publish framework navigation | Provide precise IFRS cross-references and a compliant GRI content index; label common and framework-only information. | Traceable requirement-to-disclosure map and accessible links. |
| 8. Approve assurance and claims | Reconcile the assurance scope, approve the IFRS statement, GRI statement of use and any limitations separately. | Board/technical sign-off, assurance report and release checklist. |
Hypothetical example: water impacts and financial risk
Illustrative basis-of-preparation wording
Hypothetical scenario
ILLUSTRATIVE SCENARIO — NOT COMPANY-SPECIFIC ADVICE
Organisation: a food manufacturer operates a large facility in a water-stressed catchment. Impact evidence: the facility’s abstraction contributes to seasonal scarcity affecting local households and ecosystems. The organisation identifies a significant negative impact and determines water to be a GRI material topic. It reports the impact, affected stakeholders, management approach, withdrawals and actions under applicable GRI requirements. IFRS evidence: new permit restrictions, expected production interruptions and higher water-treatment costs could materially affect future cash flows. The organisation identifies a sustainability-related risk under IFRS S1 and discloses the risk, its concentration, strategy response, current and anticipated financial effects, metrics and targets. Shared core: facility withdrawals, catchment classification, operating days, capex and control evidence. Residual differences: GRI requires the impact perspective and management of the significant impact; IFRS requires material investor information about the effect on prospects. The report should connect the two without presenting them as one identical disclosure.
Illustrative only. It shows how the decision is made, not wording that can be copied or relied on.
Hypothetical scenario
ILLUSTRATIVE WORDING — ADAPT AND TECHNICALLY REVIEW
“The report presents two complementary reporting lenses. The IFRS sustainability-related financial disclosures provide material information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the Group’s prospects. The GRI disclosures report the Group’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment and people. A common issue inventory, data dictionary and evidence register support both layers. Materiality decisions and framework-specific disclosure requirements are assessed separately. The IFRS statement of compliance and the GRI statement of use are presented independently, together with the exact scope of external assurance.”
Illustrative only. It shows how the decision is made, not wording that can be copied or relied on.
In practice
| Annotation | Why it works | What must be adapted |
|---|---|---|
| Complementary lenses | Matches the joint IFRS Foundation–GRI framing without claiming equivalence. | Actual reporting objectives and user groups. |
| Separate materiality | Prevents the GRI impact process from being presented as the IFRS materiality test. | Methodologies, criteria, evidence and approvals. |
| Common systems | Explains efficiency at the data/evidence layer rather than promising identical disclosures. | Data fields actually reused and residual transformations. |
| Independent claims | Protects the formal meaning of IFRS compliance and GRI statements of use. | Exact period, edition, GRI route, IFRS scope, assurance scope and limitations. |
In practice
Weak versus stronger presentation
| Weak wording | Problem | Stronger pattern |
|---|---|---|
| “Our GRI report is also ISSB compliant.” | GRI impact reporting does not automatically meet IFRS S1/S2 materiality, risk/opportunity and disclosure requirements. | State separately whether all IFRS requirements are met and identify the GRI statement of use. |
| “The material topics are the same for GRI and IFRS.” | GRI material topics and IFRS material information are different reporting outputs. | Show the linked issue IDs and separate conclusions; explain areas of overlap and non-overlap. |
| “GRI and IFRS use the same emissions data.” | The statement omits boundary, method, period, Scope 2, Scope 3, industry and contextual differences. | Describe the common inventory and the framework-specific adjustments or disclosures. |
| “The whole sustainability report has been assured.” | Readers cannot identify criteria, level, exclusions or whether both framework claims were included. | Cross-reference the assurance report and state subject matter, criteria, level, period and exclusions. |
In practice
Common mistakes and correction path
| Mistake | Risk | Correction |
|---|---|---|
| Converting GRI material topics directly into the IFRS risk list | Impact significance is treated as proof of investor materiality. | Assess and document how each impact gives rise to a risk or opportunity affecting prospects. |
| Dropping GRI impact-only topics from a combined report | The report becomes investor-only while still claiming GRI in accordance. | Preserve all GRI material topics and applicable disclosure requirements. |
| Using SASB metrics as a replacement for GRI Sector Standards | Industry relevance is confused with impact-sector guidance. | Apply each source for its own purpose and record the mapping relationship. |
| Using one boundary for every metric | Value-chain, impact and metric requirements are misstated. | Reconcile the base organisation to metric- and issue-specific boundaries. |
| Calling selected GRI disclosures “GRI compliant” | The formal GRI statement routes are not followed. | Use the exact in-accordance or with-reference route and content index. |
| Assuming assurance is mandatory for either framework everywhere | A recommendation, standard or local legal rule is misstated. | Identify the actual legal/contractual requirement and engagement scope. |
| Publishing one combined index with no framework labels | Readers cannot trace requirements or distinguish claims. | Maintain an accessible GRI content index and a separate IFRS disclosure map/cross-reference. |
Myth
“GRI is the stakeholder version of IFRS S1/S2, so adding an impact section to an ISSB report creates full GRI reporting.”
Reality
GRI has its own purpose, material-topic process, Universal Standards, applicable Sector Standards, Topic Standards, content-index requirements and statements of use. An impact section may be useful, but it does not establish GRI “in accordance” or “with reference”. Conversely, a GRI report does not automatically meet IFRS S1/S2.
Readiness
One-report readiness checklist
- The reporting policy states the IFRS and GRI objectives, users and intended claims separately.
- The financial-statement reporting entity and the GRI reporting organisation are reconciled.
- The issue universe distinguishes impacts, risks, opportunities and dependencies while preserving their connections.
- GRI material-topic decisions and IFRS material-information decisions have separate criteria, rationale and approval.
- Applicable GRI Sector Standards have been identified and used as required.
- SASB disclosure topics and metrics have been referred to and considered for IFRS S1.
- Each shared metric has controlled definition, boundary, period, method, estimate and evidence fields.
- Framework-specific narrative, disaggregation and contextual requirements are mapped at requirement level.
- The GRI content index is complete and uses the correct statement route.
- The IFRS compliance statement is made only after all applicable requirements are confirmed.
- The assurance description states exact criteria, level, subject matter, period and exclusions.
- The report architecture makes both lenses understandable without obscuring material information.
- Can a GRI material topic be absent from IFRS disclosures? What evidence would support that conclusion?
- Can an IFRS sustainability-related risk be material when the organisation did not cause a significant impact of the same kind?
- What are the five checks before reusing one metric in both systems?
- What is the difference between GRI “in accordance”, GRI “with reference” and IFRS compliance?
Practical tips
Give every issue one stable ID and create explicit “impact gives rise to risk/opportunity” relationships rather than duplicating descriptions.
Add purpose, materiality lens and framework claim to the data dictionary so shared numbers retain their reporting context.
Use the GRI content index as framework navigation, not as a substitute for substantive disclosures.
Use a separate IFRS requirement matrix because IFRS S1 does not prescribe a public content-index format equivalent to GRI’s.
Review combined narrative for balance: impact outcomes should not be reduced to business risk, and investor material information should not be obscured by immaterial detail.
Version all mappings and re-run them when GRI Topic/Sector Standards, SASB Standards or IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards change.
In practice
Related standards and next steps
| Relationship | Standard / resource | Use |
|---|---|---|
| Direct | IFRS S1 General Requirements | Objective, materiality, reporting entity, value chain, SASB sources, connected information and compliance statement. |
| Direct | IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures | Climate-specific risks/opportunities, scenarios, GHG emissions, industry metrics and targets. |
| Direct | GRI 1: Foundation 2021 | System architecture, nine in-accordance requirements, with-reference route, reporting principles and assurance recommendation. |
| Direct | GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 | Determining material topics based on significant impacts and reporting management of each material topic. |
| Supporting | Applicable GRI Sector and Topic Standards | Sector context and impact-specific disclosures. |
| Interoperability | IFRS Foundation–GRI joint statement, 26 May 2026 | Official framing of common and complementary disclosures. |
| Next step | Can One Dataset Support IFRS S1/S2, ESRS, GRI and CDP? | Translate the two-lens architecture into a controlled master data model. |
Rule
FINAL TAKEAWAY
The most transparent combined report does not hide the frameworks inside one generic “ESG” narrative. It shows one controlled evidence core, an IFRS investor lens, a GRI impact lens, explicit connections and separate reporting claims.
One process can share an issue inventory, data and evidence across IFRS and GRI. The conclusions remain separate: IFRS assesses material information about risks and opportunities affecting prospects, while GRI identifies significant impacts on the economy, environment and people, and each reporting claim is made independently.
Questions
Questions people ask
Is GRI equivalent to IFRS S1 and S2?
IFRS S1/S2 and the GRI Standards answer different but complementary reporting questions. IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards provide primary users of general purpose financial reports with material information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could affect the entity’s prospects. GRI enables an organisation to report its most significant impacts on the economy, environment and people, including human rights impacts, for a wide range of information users.
Can one materiality assessment support both?
One process can share an issue inventory, data and evidence across IFRS and GRI. The conclusions remain separate: IFRS assesses material information about risks and opportunities affecting prospects, while GRI identifies significant impacts on the economy, environment and people, and each reporting claim is made independently.
What is GRI in accordance?
GRI 1 provides two distinct routes. To report in accordance with the GRI Standards, the organisation must comply with all nine requirements, including the reporting principles, GRI 2 disclosures, determination of material topics, use of applicable Sector Standards, reporting on material topics, permitted omissions, a GRI content index, the statement of use and notification to GRI. An organisation using selected GRI content can instead report with reference to the GRI Standards if it complies with the three requirements for that route.
Is assurance mandatory?
GRI recommends that organisations seek external assurance and requires disclosure of the policy and practice for seeking assurance. However, external assurance is not itself one of the nine universal requirements for the “in accordance” statement. IFRS S1/S2 likewise do not impose universal assurance.
Can one GHG inventory be reused?
One report can use both systems efficiently, but it must keep the materiality processes, disclosure architecture and statements of use or compliance transparent. Shared data can be reused only after checking definitions, boundaries, methods and the distinct purpose each disclosure serves.
Framework references
Disclosures this page affects
Take it with you
The checklists as a working spreadsheet
Every checklist and table on this page, with empty status, owner and evidence columns for your team to fill in and keep.
✓ Knowledge Hub AI Assistant · Human-in-the-loop
Ask about this guide
It answers from this page, and reaches into the linked disclosure cards when your question is about the standard itself. Your first two answers are free without signing in.
Go deeper · IFRS S1 / S2
Certified IFRS S1 & S2 (ISSB) Applied Sustainability Reporting
This page settles one requirement. The IFRS S1 & S2 course walks the whole ISSB workflow — governance, strategy, risk management, metrics and targets — with drafting exercises on your own data.
