GRI 2: General Disclosures · Universal Standard
Disclosure GRI 2-28
Membership associations
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.
Open official GRI source
↗ Share
Reviewed by
Dr Ross Kurinko · GRI Certified Trainer
To prepare this disclosure
1 datapoints ↓
4 claims to verify ↓
5 evidence areas ↓
3 report examples ↓
Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to say which industry, trade, business or other membership associations it belongs to, or supports in a similar way, and to make clear the main associations that matter for understanding its external affiliations. The point is to give readers a simple picture of where the organisation is connected to collective bodies that may represent its interests, shape its positions, or influence how it engages with policy, standards or sector practice.
In practice, the focus is on completeness and clarity rather than on describing every minor affiliation. Organisations should think about the memberships that are relevant across the whole business, not just those linked to a flagship site or a single division, and present them in a way that helps users understand the organisation’s broader network and influence.
* 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Key memberships and roles | List the industry bodies, membership groups and advocacy organisations where the organisation has a meaningful role, and note the nature of that role for each one. | Membership registers, board or committee papers, external representation logs, and records of appointments or participation in working groups. | Corporate affairs / Public policy |
Show GRI 2-28 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
- List the industry bodies, membership groups, and advocacy organisations where the organisation plays a meaningful part.
- Identify each association or campaign group the organisation is involved with at a significant level.
LRA working checklist - paraphrased; see official source
How to prepare
- Set the reporting boundary first: decide which memberships you will assess, focusing on industry groups, other member-based bodies, and advocacy organisations where your organisation plays an important part.
- Define what counts as a significant role in your own process, so the same test is applied consistently across all relevant memberships.
- Gather the underlying records that show where you participate and the nature of that participation, so you can support the final disclosure with evidence.
- Prepare the disclosure content by listing the relevant organisations in plain language, using a narrative format if that is the clearest way to present the information.
- Check whether any memberships were left out, or whether the scope changed during the reporting period, and note those exclusions or changes clearly.
- Before finalising, compare your draft with the official source to confirm you have covered the required memberships and have not added or missed anything.
Request the memberships and advocacy list from Legal / Secretariat
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
Which external membership bodies and advocacy groups does the organisation take an active role in, for the reporting period?
Use your organisation’s own labels first, then map them to the reporting disclosure. For example, you may track trade bodies, sector groups, policy forums, or public-affairs coalitions under different internal names. Keep the request in your normal business language and only translate it for reporting after the data is returned.
Weak request
Please provide the GRI 2-28 membership associations disclosure data.
Why it fails: It uses framework language that many internal owners will not recognise, and it does not say what to pull, from where, or how to describe the organisation’s own categories. That makes it harder to answer consistently and increases the chance of missing active roles in external bodies.
Better request
Please send the list of external bodies where [organisation] had an active role during [period], using your normal internal names and categories. For each one, include the role, scope, whether it was active in the period, and the source record so we can map it for reporting.
Formal email template
Subject: Request for membership and advocacy body list for [reporting period] Dear [name], Please could you share the current list of external bodies where [organisation] had an active role during [reporting period]. For each entry, please include: - the body’s name as used internally - the type of body, if you track this - the role or level of involvement - the geography or scope - whether the involvement was active at any point in the period - the source record or document Please use your normal internal terms first, then we will map them for reporting. This is a training template only; please adapt it to your organisation and check the source material before sign-off. Many thanks, [preparer name]
Short Teams / Slack version
Hi [name] — could you send over the list of external bodies where [organisation] had an active role in [period]? Please include the internal name, type of body, role, scope, and source record. Use your usual terms first; we’ll map them for reporting. This is a training template only, so please adapt it and check the source before sign-off. Thanks.
Industry examples
Manufacturing
Context. The business tracks trade bodies, standards forums, and policy coalitions through Company Secretariat and Public Affairs.
Adapted request. Please share the list of trade bodies, standards groups, and policy forums where [organisation] had an active role during [period]. Include the internal name, the type of group, the role held, the region covered, and the source record.
Example response. Internal body name: UK Manufacturing Forum; Body type: trade body; Role / level of involvement: committee member; Geography / scope: UK; Active during period (Y/N): Y; Source reference: Secretariat register entry 2025-04-12
Financial services
Context. The firm records industry groups, policy working groups, and market forums in a public-affairs tracker.
Adapted request. Please provide the list of industry groups and policy forums where [organisation] took an active part during [period]. Use the names from the public-affairs tracker and include the role, scope, and evidence source.
Example response. Internal body name: Payments Policy Working Group; Body type: policy forum; Role / level of involvement: working group lead; Geography / scope: UK and Ireland; Active during period (Y/N): Y; Source reference: Public Affairs tracker PA-1187
The full request pack — response form, data table, evidence metadata and sign-off — is in the Download Centre.
Draft your disclosure
LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.
Method note
Explain how you decided which outside groups to include, what you mean by a meaningful role, and whether the list covers direct memberships only or also other forms of participation.
Context note
Set out why these external links matter for the organisation, for example by showing where it helps shape sector views, policy positions, or shared initiatives.
Fluctuation statement
If the number of memberships or active roles has changed, note whether this reflects new joins, exits, restructures, or a different view of what counts as a meaningful role.
Content index entry
GRI 2-28 Membership associations — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre
Professional preparation tools and forms for GRI 2-28. Each download includes a concise “How to use” guide.
Assurance readiness
For each claim, check the evidence
| Claim | Risk | Evidence to check |
|---|---|---|
| The information reported for this disclosure reconciles to the underlying source records. | What is reported cannot be traced back to the systems or documents it was drawn from, or does not tie out to them. | calculation_workbook reconciling the reported value to source_system_export |
| The information reported for this disclosure is current as at the reporting date. | The disclosure reflects a different period, a cut-off before the reporting date, or stale data carried over from a prior period. | approval_record showing the data cut-off date and the period covered |
| The scope behind the information reported for this disclosure is applied consistently. | Parts of the organisation are silently in or out of scope, or the scope differs from the prior period without that change being explained. | methodology defining the scope and a site_register of what it covers |
| Everything in scope is included in the information reported for this disclosure — nothing material is left out. | Parts of the population that should be reported are omitted, understating or overstating the disclosure. | site_register of the full population vs the calculation_workbook of what was actually included |
Evidence pack to prepare
- The governing policy or written commitment behind this disclosure
- A methodology / definition note setting out how the disclosure was scoped and prepared
- Source-system exports the figures or facts were drawn from
- The internal approval / sign-off record for the disclosure before publication
- Minutes or records evidencing the relevant engagement or consultation
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.
Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data
- Wrong owner
The request goes to the wrong team or person, so the list is built from partial knowledge and misses memberships held elsewhere in the organisation.
- Framework language used
The data call is written in reporting jargon instead of the organisation’s own terms, so colleagues cannot tell which subscriptions, affiliations, or advocacy groups should be included.
- Scope not fixed
No one agrees which parts of the business are in scope, so some entities, regions, or subsidiaries are counted while others are left out without explanation.
- Wrong time basis
The team pulls names from the wrong reporting period or snapshot date, so the membership list does not match the period being reported.
- Mixed counting basis
One source lists active memberships while another includes dormant or historical entries, and the two are merged without separating the different counting bases.
- Source labels lost
Original system names, category tags, or register labels are stripped out during consolidation, making it impossible to trace each entry back to the source record.
- Populations merged
Industry bodies, general membership groups, and advocacy organisations are combined into one pool even though they should be kept separate for checking and review.
- No evidence trail
The file is saved without the supporting extract, date stamp, or sign-off record, so nobody can show where the list came from or who approved it.
Where judgement is often needed
- What counts as a significant role
Set a clear internal threshold for when involvement is material enough to list, explain that basis in the note, and apply it consistently across all groups you review.
- Newly joined or exited bodies during the year
Decide whether to include organisations joined or left part-way through the period, state the cut-off date you used, and make the timing basis clear in the disclosure.
- Acquired or sold business units with their own memberships
When a purchase or disposal changes the group perimeter, explain whether those memberships are brought in or removed from the list for the reporting period and why that treatment was chosen.
- Different local names for the same type of body
Where countries use different labels or legal forms, group similar organisations under a consistent internal description and note any local naming differences so readers can understand the scope.
- Borderline cases with indirect or passive involvement
If the organisation has only observer, affiliate, sponsor, or similar involvement, decide whether that rises to the level you track as significant and disclose the rule used for those edge cases.
- Using estimates where records are incomplete
If the full list cannot be confirmed from source records, use a documented estimate only where necessary, say so plainly, and describe how the estimate was built and checked.
- Rounding and presentation of long lists
Choose one presentation rule for names, dates, and counts, apply it consistently, and make sure rounding or grouping does not hide a membership that would otherwise meet your inclusion rule.
- Protecting sensitive names or affiliations
If naming a body could create privacy, security, or legal issues, aggregate the information at a higher level where needed, explain the reason for that grouping, and keep the disclosure as informative as possible.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Consumer goods manufacturing · synthetic · written by LRA
This example shows how a reporter can describe the external groups where it has an active, material role, while separating trade, membership, and advocacy bodies and keeping the figures internally consistent.
We keep a live register of the external bodies where we play a meaningful part, and we review it during the year so the list stays current.
- In this synthetic example, we took a significant role in 6 organisations in total: 2 trade groups, 3 wider membership bodies, and 1 policy-focused advocacy network.
- That means 33% were trade groups, 50% were membership bodies, and 17% were advocacy organisations; the three parts add up to the full 6.
Business services · synthetic · written by LRA
This example illustrates a second plausible reporter using the same disclosure idea in different wording, with a different sector and a different mix of external bodies.
In this synthetic disclosure, we summarise the outside organisations where we are more than a passive participant and where our involvement is significant.
- We had a notable role in 8 bodies altogether: 4 industry associations, 2 other membership organisations, and 2 national or cross-border advocacy groups.
- The split is 50% industry associations, 25% other membership organisations, and 25% advocacy groups, with each part adding up to the total of 8.
Draft output & visualisation ideas
How to turn the collected data into a draft disclosure. Suggested visuals and a GRI content-index line generated from this disclosure's datapoints.
Suggested visuals
- Memberships by organisation type — table: A list of the external bodies the organisation is involved with, grouped by type such as trade, professional, or public-interest groups, and noting where the organisation has a meaningful role.
- Role level across memberships — stacked bar: How many memberships sit in each role category, split between ordinary participation and more active involvement.
- Participation by external body category — bar: The count of memberships in each category of outside organisation, such as industry groups, wider membership bodies, and advocacy networks.
- Active roles within external groups — donut: The share of memberships where the organisation has a significant role compared with all other memberships.
- Memberships over time — line: How the number of external memberships, or the number with a meaningful role, changes across reporting periods.
From a number to a disclosure
What separates a figure from a disclosure.
Basic
We take part in 12 membership groups.
Better
We take part in 12 membership groups, including 4 industry bodies, 5 wider trade or professional groups, and 3 national or international advocacy networks.
Best
At year end, we were active in 12 membership groups across industry, wider trade or professional bodies, and national or international advocacy networks; this was unchanged from last year because our participation approach stayed the same.
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. The confidence label shows how closely each match maps to GRI 2-28 — these are report practice, not exact disclosure examples.
| Company | Sector · Country | Year | Match | Page | Report | Assurance | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
Interconexión Eléctrica S.A. E.S.P. | Electric Utilities / IPP / Energy Traders · Colombia | 2024 | Partial | p. 136 →p. 143 → | ISA Integrated Management Report 2024 → | ey | ||||||
Evidence in Interconexión Eléctrica S.A. E.S.P.’s reportWhat the report shows Interconexión Eléctrica S.A. E.S.P.'s ISA Integrated Management Report 2024 includes a statement on business relationships, noting no significant changes (p.131). The report also details employee engagement with a company initiative, with 3,408 survey responses showing 97% familiarity and 94% confidence (p.33). However, the report does not clearly provide comprehensive data or findings specifically addressing other aspects of the disclosure, leaving some elements unclear or missing.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
|||||||||||||
 |
Hindustan Zinc Limited | Mining — Iron, Aluminum, Other Metals · India | 2025 | Partial | p. 112 →p. 128 →p. 116 → | Sustainability Report 2024-25 → | EY; BSI | ||||||
Evidence in Hindustan Zinc Limited’s reportWhat the report shows Hindustan Zinc Limited’s Sustainability Report 2024-25 provides specific information on its membership associations related to sustainability and industry, as noted on page 112. The report also references operations and suppliers concerning the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining on page 116, indicating some coverage of labour rights issues. However, the report lacks clear, detailed disclosures on governance structures or policy commitments directly linked to these topics, with relevant mentions on pages 111 and 128 being more general and not explicitly tied to the disclosure in question.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
|||||||||||||
 |
MOEVE, S.A. | Oil and Gas · Spain | 2025 | Partial | p. 59 →p. 74 →p. 155 → | Consolidated Management Report 2025 → | EY; BSI | ||||||
Evidence in MOEVE, S.A.’s reportWhat the report shows MOEVE, S.A.'s Consolidated Management Report 2025 provides a reported value related to the energy industry, showing figures of 313,401 euros for 2025 and 292,610 euros for 2024 on page 133. This is the strongest covered datapoint found in the report. However, there is no further narrative or contextual information explaining these figures or their relevance to the disclosure, leaving other aspects unclear.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
|||||||||||||
Check your understanding
The sustainability team is compiling the annual report and has a long list of external groups the organisation belongs to, including trade bodies, local business networks, and a national policy forum. Some memberships are passive, but the organisation chairs one sector group and leads a working group in another.Which memberships should be included in the disclosure, and how should the team decide what to leave out?
Model answer. Include the groups where the organisation plays a meaningful part, such as leading, chairing, or otherwise having a notable influence in the group’s work. Do not list every network or association by default; keep the focus on the industry bodies, other membership groups, and advocacy organisations where the organisation is involved in a significant way. If a membership is only nominal or inactive, it would not normally belong in this disclosure.
Why this matters. The disclosure is about meaningful participation, not a full register of every affiliation.
A preparer has drafted a table of external memberships and is unsure whether to include a global campaign coalition that the organisation joined for one policy issue. The organisation does not pay dues, but its director sits on the coalition’s steering group and speaks on its behalf at meetings.Does this coalition belong in the disclosure, even though the organisation is not a paying member?
Model answer. Yes, if the organisation is taking a significant role in that coalition, it should be reported. The key point is the level of participation and influence, not whether the arrangement is labelled as a subscription membership or whether fees are paid. The preparer should describe the relevant group in plain language and include it because the organisation is actively involved in shaping its work.
Why this matters. What matters is the organisation’s role in the group, not the label attached to the relationship.
The report draft includes a regional chamber, a standards forum, and an international advocacy network. The team is debating whether to mention a small local club that the organisation joined for networking, even though no one attends meetings and it has no policy or sector influence.Should the local club be disclosed alongside the more influential groups?
Model answer. No, not if the organisation has no meaningful involvement there. The disclosure is aimed at groups where the organisation participates in a significant way, so a purely social or inactive affiliation would usually be left out. The team should keep the list to the associations and advocacy groups where the organisation’s role is material enough to matter to readers.
Why this matters. Exclude casual or inactive affiliations; keep the focus on significant participation.
A draft narrative says the organisation is involved in several trade and policy groups, but it does not explain which ones are actually significant. One of the groups is a national industry association where the organisation holds a board seat, while another is an international campaign network where it only receives newsletters.How should the preparer separate the groups that belong in the disclosure from those that do not?
Model answer. The preparer should identify the groups where the organisation has an active, important role and report those. A board seat is a clear sign of significant participation, so the industry association should be included. A newsletter-only relationship does not show the same level of involvement, so it would normally be excluded. The disclosure should therefore reflect the organisation’s meaningful memberships, not every contact or mailing list.
Why this matters. Use the organisation’s actual level of involvement to decide what is material enough to report.
Analyse this disclosure across real reports
See how companies actually report GRI 2-28 — drawn from their own published reports, with the exact pages, and an LRA AI-assistant that works through it with you. Available to LRA Community members and to students throughout their platform access.
Related framework references
How this disclosure maps across the major reporting frameworks.
Related & explore
Organizational details Guide ✓Nomination and selection of the highest g… Guide ✓Chair of the highest governance body Guide ✓Role of the highest governance body in ov… Guide ✓Delegation of responsibility for managing… Guide ✓Role of the highest governance body in su… Guide ✓Conflicts of interest Guide ✓Communication of critical concerns Guide ✓Collective knowledge of the highest gover… Guide ✓Evaluation of the performance of the high… Guide ✓Remuneration policies Guide ✓Entities included in the organization’s s… Guide ✓Process to determine remuneration Guide ✓Annual total compensation ratio Guide ✓Statement on sustainable development stra… Guide ✓Policy commitments Guide ✓Embedding policy commitments Guide ✓Processes to remediate negative impacts Guide ✓Mechanisms for seeking advice and raising… Guide ✓Compliance with laws and regulations Guide ✓Approach to stakeholder engagement Guide ✓Reporting period, frequency and contact p… Guide ✓Collective bargaining agreements Guide ✓Restatements of information Guide ✓External assurance Guide ✓Activities, value chain and other busines… Guide ✓Employees Guide ✓Workers who are not employees Guide ✓Governance structure and composition Guide ✓
Questions this page answers
For GRI 2-28, what counts as the key memberships and roles I need to gather before drafting the disclosure?
The page says the datapoints to prepare are the organisation’s key memberships and roles. Use the plain-language explainer and the step-by-step preparation section to decide which memberships and roles are relevant for your reporting boundary and evidence pack. ↑ section
How do I use the step-by-step 'how to prepare' section for GRI 2-28 in practice?
Use it as a working checklist to move from identifying the relevant memberships and roles to assembling the supporting evidence and drafting the disclosure. It is designed to help a practitioner turn source data into a report-ready output. ↑ section
What evidence should I keep for GRI 2-28 so the disclosure is assurance-ready?
The page includes an evidence pack with five items for assurance readiness, plus four assurance claims to verify. Use those together to build a file that shows the claim, the risk, and the supporting evidence for each point. ↑ section
What are the four assurance claims to verify for GRI 2-28, and how do I use them?
The page provides four claims to check, each linked to a risk and evidence. In practice, use them as a review list to test whether the disclosure is complete, consistent and backed by documents before sign-off. ↑ section
How should I build the evidence pack for GRI 2-28 if I am the HR or data owner?
Start with the five evidence-pack items on the page and match each one to the relevant membership or role data. Keep the source records, the logic used to select what is in scope, and anything needed to explain the final draft. ↑ section
What are the common reporting gaps or mistakes for GRI 2-28 that I should avoid?
The page lists common reporting gaps and mistakes to watch for. Use that section as a pre-submission check so you can spot missing scope, weak evidence, or unclear drafting before the disclosure is finalised. ↑ section
How do I use the synthetic example disclosure for GRI 2-28 without copying it into my report?
Treat the example as a model for structure, level of detail and presentation, not as a template to copy. The page’s illustrative example is synthetic and internally consistent, so it is there to show how the disclosure can be turned into a draft. ↑ section
What can I take from the GRI 2-28 draft-output section when I am turning data into a narrative?
The draft-output section gives visualisation ideas, narrative starters and a GRI content-index line. Use those to convert your prepared data into a clear first draft and to show where the disclosure sits in your reporting pack. ↑ section
How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for GRI 2-28?
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format. Use it to organise the preparation steps, track evidence and support assurance readiness before you draft the disclosure. ↑ section
What is the printable Library Card for GRI 2-28 and when should I use it?
The Download Centre also includes a printable Library Card in .pdf format. It is useful as a quick reference while you are collecting data, checking the evidence pack and reviewing the draft. ↑ section
Where can I find real published company examples for GRI 2-28?
The page has a 'From company reports' table that links to real published reports at the pages where the topic is disclosed. Use it to see how the disclosure appears in practice, while still relying on your own organisation’s data and evidence. ↑ section
More questions this page can help with
- GRI 2-28 key memberships and roles: what should I ask HR, Legal or the company secretary for?
- GRI 2-28 assurance-ready evidence pack: what documents should I pull together first?
- How do I decide the scope for GRI 2-28 key memberships and roles before drafting?
- What are the most common mistakes people make when reporting GRI 2-28?
- How do I turn the GRI 2-28 example into a draft narrative and table?
- What should go into the GRI 2-28 content index line?
- How do I use the GRI 2-28 workbook to track ownership and evidence?
- What does the GRI 2-28 plain-language explainer help me decide?
- How do I check the four assurance claims for GRI 2-28 before sign-off?
- Where in the page can I find visualisation ideas for GRI 2-28?
- Can I use the company report examples as a template for GRI 2-28?
- Does the page give an ESRS or ISSB mapping for GRI 2-28?
✓ LRA AI Assistant · human-in-the-loop
Ask Study Studio AI assistant about this disclosure
Get a practical answer for your reporting context. Your first answer is free — create a free account to continue the conversation.
Try
Sources, status and disclaimer
This LRA assistance tool is designed for educational and internal data-collection purposes. It is not an official interpretation of the GRI Standards, IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards or EU CSRD/ESRS requirements. When applying these frameworks in professional practice, users should consult and double-check the official standards, guidance and applicable regulatory sources.
