GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 · Topic Standard · Cross-sectoral
Disclosure GRI 101-1
Policies to halt and reverse biodiversity loss
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
7 datapoints ↓
6 claims to verify ↓
5 evidence areas ↓
3 report examples ↓
Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to explain whether it has policies in place that are intended to stop and reverse biodiversity loss, and how those policies apply in practice. The focus is not just on having a statement on paper, but on showing that the organisation has a clear approach to protecting nature and reducing harm to ecosystems through its own activities and decisions.
In practical terms, the key question is coverage: do these policies apply across the whole organisation and its relevant operations, or only to selected sites, projects, or business units? Reporters should be ready to describe the scope of the policy, where it applies, and whether it is embedded consistently rather than limited to flagship locations or isolated initiatives.
* 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Biodiversity policy summary | Capture the organisation’s stated approach for stopping and reversing biodiversity decline, and note how that approach has been shaped by the long-term and 2030 aims in the global biodiversity framework. | Board-approved policy, sustainability strategy, or internal position paper showing the policy text and the source used to shape it. | Sustainability / ESG |
| Coverage of operations | Capture which parts of the business the policy or commitment applies to, including the organisation’s own activities and relevant external relationships, and state any exclusions or limits clearly. | Policy scope statement, legal entity map, supplier/partner coverage note, or implementation plan showing where the commitment applies. | Sustainability / ESG |
| Biodiversity goals and targets | Capture the specific biodiversity goals and targets the organisation has set to stop and reverse loss, with enough detail to show what is being measured and aimed for. | Target register, strategy document, or KPI sheet approved by management or the board. | Sustainability / ESG |
| Science basis check | Capture whether the biodiversity goals and targets have been developed using scientific evidence or expert consensus, and record the basis used for that judgement. | Technical rationale, external expert review, scientific source list, or internal sign-off explaining the evidence basis. | Sustainability / ESG |
| Base year start date | Capture the date on which the base year begins for the biodiversity metric or target, using the same date convention as the target record. | Target definition sheet, methodology note, or reporting workbook showing the base-year period start. | Sustainability / ESG |
| Base year end date | Capture the date on which the base year ends for the biodiversity metric or target, using the same date convention as the target record. | Target definition sheet, methodology note, or reporting workbook showing the base-year period end. | Sustainability / ESG |
| Progress measures | Capture the indicators the organisation uses to track progress against its biodiversity goals and targets, including the exact measures and units used internally. | KPI dashboard, target tracker, or methodology note listing the indicators and how they are calculated. | Sustainability / ESG |
Show GRI 101-1 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
- Check that the biodiversity goals and targets are built on recognised scientific evidence.
- Set out the policies or commitments for stopping and reversing biodiversity loss, and explain how they draw on the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework’s 2050 goals and 2030 targets.
- State the closing date for the baseline year.
- Explain how far the policies or commitments cover the organisation’s own operations and its business relationships.
- Set out the biodiversity goals and targets for stopping and reversing loss.
- Name the measures used to track progress.
- State the opening date for the baseline year.
LRA working checklist - paraphrased; see official source
How to prepare
- Set the reporting boundary first: decide which parts of the business and which external relationships are covered by the policy or commitment, and make that scope clear in your working papers.
- Write the substance of the policy or commitment in plain language, including how it is linked to the 2050 and 2030 biodiversity aims in the global framework, without adding material that is not actually in the source documents.
- List the biodiversity goals and targets you will report, and confirm whether they are based on scientific agreement; keep the wording and supporting evidence aligned to the approved internal source.
- Record the baseline period for those goals and targets by capturing both the opening and closing dates of the reference year, and check that the dates are consistent across all reporting materials.
- Identify the measures you will use to track progress, then gather the underlying records, calculations, and narrative support so each reported point can be traced back to evidence.
- Before finalising, note any exclusions, scope changes, or updates from the prior period, then compare the draft disclosure against the official source to make sure nothing has been missed or misstated.
Request the biodiversity policy and target evidence from Sustainability / Environment / ESG
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
What wording, scope and supporting evidence do we have for our biodiversity policy commitments, related targets, and the way we track progress?
Use your organisation’s own names for the policy owner, target-setting process, and tracking tools first, then map them to the reporting fields below. Keep the request in business language your team already uses, and check the source material before sign-off.
Weak request
Please send the biodiversity disclosure evidence for GRI 101-1, including the policy description, scope, targets, scientific basis, baseline dates, and indicators.
Why it fails: This uses framework wording that many internal owners will not recognise, so it is harder to action. It also bundles several concepts without saying which document or system to pull from, which makes the response slower and less complete.
Better request
Please send the current nature or biodiversity policy, any related targets or goals, the baseline period, the measures we use to track progress, and a short note on where the policy applies across our sites and business relationships. Include the document name, version, owner, approval date, and storage location.
Formal email template
Subject: Request for biodiversity policy and target evidence Hi [name], I’m pulling together the evidence pack for our biodiversity reporting and need your help with the material held by [team name]. Could you please send the latest version of the following, for [reporting period / boundary]: - the current policy or commitment statement on biodiversity or nature - any linked targets or goals and the basis used to set them - the reference period used as the baseline - the measures we use internally to track progress - a short note on where the policy applies across our operations and business relationships - any supporting documents that show how the policy or targets were developed or approved Please include the document name, version, approval date, owner, and the folder or system location for each item. If anything is still in draft, please flag that clearly. Please adapt this to your organisation’s own terms and check the source material before sign-off. Thanks, [preparer name]
Short Teams / Slack version
Hi [name] — could you share the latest biodiversity / nature policy, any related targets, the baseline period, and the measures we use to track progress for [period / boundary]? Please include the document name, version, approval date, owner, and where it’s stored. If anything is draft, please flag it. Thanks.
Industry examples
Manufacturing
Context. A plant-based business with site-level environmental management and supplier oversight.
Adapted request. Hi [name] — for [period / boundary], could you share the current nature or biodiversity policy, any site or group targets, the baseline dates, and the indicators used in our environmental tracker? Please also note whether the policy covers our own sites only or extends to suppliers and contractors, and include the document details and storage location.
Example response. Attached: Nature Policy v4, approved 12 Feb 2025; Biodiversity Roadmap 2025–2030; baseline 1 Jan 2024 to 31 Dec 2024; indicators: hectares restored, supplier screening coverage, and site action completion rate; scope: group sites plus tier-1 suppliers in priority categories.
Financial services
Context. A lender or investor with portfolio and operational policies.
Adapted request. Hi [name] — could you send the latest nature policy, any biodiversity-related targets, the baseline period, and the measures used to monitor progress for [period / boundary]? Please include whether the policy applies to our own operations only or also to financed or invested relationships, and share the document details and file location.
Example response. Attached: Nature and Biodiversity Policy, approved 5 Apr 2025; portfolio target note; baseline 1 Jul 2024 to 30 Jun 2025; indicators: client engagement coverage, sector screening completion, and internal review milestones; scope: own operations and selected client relationships in high-priority sectors.
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
State how the biodiversity policies, commitments, goals, baseline period and progress measures were defined, including the period chosen for comparison and the indicators used to track change.
Context note
Explain what the figures show about the organisation’s approach to reducing biodiversity harm, how widely the commitments apply, and how the selected indicators link to the stated goals.
Fluctuation statement
If the numbers changed materially, note whether this reflects a wider scope of coverage, a revised baseline period, updated targets, or a change in the indicators used to assess progress.
Content index entry
GRI 101-1 Policies to halt and reverse biodiversity loss — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre
Professional preparation tools and forms for GRI 101-1. Each download includes a concise “How to use” guide.
Assurance readiness
For each claim, check the evidence
| Claim | Risk | Evidence to check |
|---|---|---|
| We have set out the policy or commitment in our own words and linked it to the long-term biodiversity direction and nearer-term milestones we say we are using. | The statement may be too generic, may not actually reflect the organisation’s position, or may not show a real link to the stated biodiversity framework milestones. | Approved policy text or commitment statement; internal mapping note showing how it was aligned to the long-term and interim biodiversity goals; board or management approval records; version history showing when the wording was finalised. |
| We have made clear which parts of the business and which external relationships are covered, and where the boundary stops. | Coverage may be overstated or unclear, with excluded entities, sites, suppliers or other relationships not properly justified. | Scope memo or boundary paper; list of included entities, sites, operations and relevant relationships; exclusion rationale for any omitted areas; organisational charts, contract lists or group structure records used to define coverage. |
| We have stated the biodiversity goals and targets we are using, and they are the ones that were approved for reporting. | Targets may be incomplete, outdated, or inconsistent with internal plans or public statements. | Target register; approved strategy or action plan; meeting minutes or sign-off showing adoption; cross-check between reported targets and source documents. |
| We checked that the goals and targets were built from recognised scientific evidence rather than being set ad hoc. | The assurer may question whether the targets are genuinely evidence-based or only described that way in the report. | Scientific references, technical papers or expert input notes relied on in setting the targets; internal rationale paper; correspondence with specialists; documented review showing how the evidence informed the target design. |
| We have identified the baseline period we used, including when it starts. | The baseline may be ambiguous, inconsistent with the metrics reported, or not traceable to source records. | Baseline definition document; reporting methodology note; source data extract showing the first date in the baseline period; reconciliation between baseline and current-period calculations. |
| We have identified the baseline period we used, including when it ends. | The end point may be misstated, or the baseline may not be comparable with later reporting periods. | Baseline definition document; calculation workbook; evidence of the final date included in the baseline; review notes confirming comparability with later periods. |
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 data request goes to the wrong team, so the person who actually holds the policy, target, or indicator evidence is never asked.
- Framework language only
The request is written in reporting jargon instead of the organisation’s own terms, so staff cannot match it to the documents they use day to day.
- Scope left vague
No one defines which parts of the business and which external relationships are in scope, so the evidence set is incomplete or too broad.
- Base-year dates mixed up
The team records the wrong start and end dates for the baseline period, which makes later progress checks inconsistent.
- Counting basis not aligned
Different teams use different ways of counting or grouping the same information, so the final dataset cannot be compared cleanly.
- Source labels lost
Original file names, version tags, or system labels are stripped out during collection, making it hard to trace each figure back to its source.
- Separate populations merged
Data for distinct parts of the organisation or different relationship types is combined when it should stay separate, which hides where the policy actually applies.
- Evidence trail incomplete
The pack is assembled without the supporting notes, dates, and reviewer sign-off needed to show who checked the data and when.
Where judgement is often needed
- Setting the group boundary after a buy-in or sale
If a site, subsidiary or joint arrangement has been added or removed during the period, explain whether the policy coverage, goals and progress measures were updated from the transaction date or kept on the prior group basis, and state the approach used.
- Using local legal terms versus one group-wide definition
Where countries use different biodiversity or habitat definitions, choose one consistent internal interpretation for reporting and disclose any local variations so readers can see how coverage was aligned across the business.
- Including operations that sit partly inside the scope
For assets, suppliers or partnerships that only partly fall within the organisation’s activities or business relationships, explain the rule used to decide inclusion, exclusion or partial coverage and how that affected the reported extent.
- Choosing the date that anchors the base period
If the starting point for the base period is not the same as the date the policy was approved or the date data became available, disclose which date was used, why it was chosen and whether it was applied consistently across targets and indicators.
- Measured data versus modelled estimates
When direct biodiversity data are incomplete, state which figures come from measurement and which are estimated, describe the method used to fill gaps and explain any material effect on the goals, targets or progress indicators.
- Selecting the progress indicator set
If several indicators could track progress, explain why the chosen set best reflects the organisation’s biodiversity aims, how each indicator links to the goals and targets, and whether any indicators were excluded because they were not reliable or comparable.
- Rounding and small-number treatment
Set out the rounding rule used for dates, percentages or counts, and explain any threshold for combining small values so that the reported extent and progress do not give a misleading impression.
- Protecting sensitive location or partner data
Where naming a site, species, supplier or community would create a privacy or security issue, disclose the information at a higher level of aggregation and explain the level chosen so the reader understands the limitation.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Food manufacturing · synthetic · written by LRA
Illustrative only: shows how a reporter can describe a biodiversity policy, its scope across operations and business links, the target setting approach, the base-year timing, and the measures used to monitor progress.
Synthetic example only. We set out how our biodiversity policy is meant to stop net loss and support recovery, and we explain that it was shaped by the long-term 2050 nature aims and the nearer-term 2030 milestones in the global biodiversity framework. The policy covers our own sites and the main parts of our value chain, with full coverage for owned operations and 85% of tier 1 suppliers by spend; it also sets a 2024 base year, a 2030 target year, and science-based goals to cut habitat pressure, restore degraded land, and improve species outcomes.
- We track progress with hectares restored, hectares under nature-sensitive management, supplier coverage, and a biodiversity condition score.
- The targets were developed using published ecological evidence and external scientific review, and we review them annually against the base year.
Infrastructure services · synthetic · written by LRA
Illustrative only: shows a different sector using plain language to explain nature commitments, where they apply, the baseline and target dates, the evidence basis, and the indicators used to follow progress.
Synthetic example only. Our commitments describe how we intend to reduce harm to nature and help reverse decline, with the wording aligned to the 2050 nature direction and the 2030 milestones in the global biodiversity framework. They apply to all directly managed assets and to selected contractors and joint arrangements where we can influence practice; for the 2023 base year we set 2030 end points for lower land disturbance, better habitat connectivity, and stronger protection of sensitive areas, and those aims were built from scientific evidence and specialist advice.
- We assess delivery through kilometres of corridor managed for nature, area of restored habitat, share of contracts with biodiversity clauses, and an overall nature-risk score.
- Coverage is complete for owned assets, while 72% of contractors by spend and 100% of joint arrangements are within scope.
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
- Policy coverage across the business — table: Which parts of the organisation and which external relationships are covered by the biodiversity-related policy set, alongside any gaps or partial coverage.
- Targets and milestones timeline — line: The main biodiversity goals and milestones over time, including the chosen starting point for the baseline period and the end point used for comparison.
- Progress indicators by objective — bar: The measures selected to track delivery against each biodiversity objective, with each indicator shown against its related target.
- Coverage of commitments by activity type — stacked bar: How far the biodiversity commitments extend across the organisation’s own operations and its wider business relationships, split by coverage level.
- Basis for target-setting — donut: The share of biodiversity targets that are described as being shaped by scientific evidence versus any other stated basis, if applicable.
From a number to a disclosure
What separates a figure from a disclosure.
Basic
We have a biodiversity policy covering our own operations and key suppliers.
Better
We have a biodiversity policy covering all our operations and selected business partners, with goals, a 2022–2024 base period, and indicators such as habitat area and species impact.
Best
We have a biodiversity policy covering all our operations and material business relationships, with science-informed goals, a 2022–2024 base period, and indicators including habitat area and species impact; the latest update shows a wider scope because we added more supplier sites to the review.
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. The confidence label shows how closely each match maps to GRI 101-1 — these are report practice, not exact disclosure examples.
| Company | Sector · Country | Year | Match | Page | Report | Assurance | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
Tata AutoComp Systems Limited | Automobiles and Components · India | 2025 | Exact | p. 113 →p. 73 →p. 74 → | Tata AutoComp Sustainability Report FY 2024-25 → | ey | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evidence in Tata AutoComp Systems Limited’s reportWhat the report shows Tata AutoComp Systems Limited’s Sustainability Report FY 2024-25 includes coverage of biodiversity management, with a percentage of sites having biodiversity management plans reported on page 15, alongside data on Scope 1 emissions and water intensity. The report also details policies related to biodiversity loss, water discharge, waste diversion, and energy management on pages 113 and 114. However, several narrative items lack quotable evidence, indicating some aspects of the disclosure remain unaddressed or unclear in the report.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Sumitomo Forestry Co., Ltd. | Home Building · Japan | 2025 | Partial | p. 529 →p. 215 →p. 5 → | Sustainability Report 2025 → | EY; BSI | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evidence in Sumitomo Forestry Co., Ltd.’s reportWhat the report shows Sumitomo Forestry Co., Ltd.’s Sustainability Report 2025 includes several references to biodiversity-related policies and commitments, such as efforts to reverse nature loss aligned with the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (p.239) and the establishment of an Environmental Philosophy since 1994 (p.76). The report also details management approaches to biodiversity impacts and policies aimed at halting and reversing biodiversity loss (p.529), as well as targets based on scientific evidence in forestry and land use sectors (p.179). However, some narrative items lack specific quotable evidence or detailed data points, as indicated by missing pages for certain disclosures.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Godrej Properties Limited | Real Estate · India | 2025 | Exact | p. 63 →p. 264 →p. 64 → | Integrated Report 2024-25 → | KPMG | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evidence in Godrej Properties Limited’s reportWhat the report shows Godrej Properties Limited’s Integrated Report 2024-25 includes several covered datapoints relevant to the disclosure, such as a brief numeric reference on page 211 and detailed mentions of commitments to integrity, climate policy advocacy, and sustainability across the value chain on page 262. The report also addresses biodiversity preservation and management, referencing specific pages (122-125) and GRI standards on page 264. However, several narrative items remain unaddressed or unclear, with no quotable evidence found for them in the report.
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
A group policy says the business will reduce nature-related harm, but the draft only mentions site operations and leaves out suppliers, contractors, and joint ventures. The team also has a separate biodiversity note that was written before the latest global nature framework was adopted.Should you describe the policy as covering the wider business network, and should you explain how it reflects the 2050 and 2030 nature goals?
Model answer. No. The write-up should make clear whether the policy or commitment reaches only the organisation’s own operations or also its wider business links, and it should explain how the policy was shaped by the long-term and 2030 nature goals in the global biodiversity framework. If the draft does not yet do that, it needs revision before sign-off.
Why this matters. State both the reach of the policy and the way it was shaped by the global biodiversity framework.
A preparer has a biodiversity target to restore habitat by 2030, but the target was set using an internal baseline with no clear start and end dates for the reference period. The team wants to report the target anyway because the headline goal sounds strong.Can you report the target without defining the base period dates?
Model answer. No. The target can only be described properly if the reference period is clear, including when it starts and when it ends. Without those dates, readers cannot understand what the target is measured against, so the disclosure is incomplete.
Why this matters. A biodiversity target needs a clear baseline period, not just a headline ambition.
The sustainability team has a nature goal that was reviewed by ecologists, but the draft report does not say whether the goal was shaped by scientific agreement or what measures will be used to track progress. The only metric mentioned is a general statement that the company will 'improve biodiversity'.What should you check before finalising the disclosure?
Model answer. You should confirm whether the goal was informed by scientific consensus and, if so, say that plainly. You also need to identify the indicators that will be used to track progress, rather than relying on a broad statement that is too vague to assess.
Why this matters. A credible biodiversity goal needs a science basis and clear progress measures.
A company has a policy for its own sites, but procurement, logistics, and franchise partners are not covered. The draft report says the policy applies 'across the business' even though several business relationships are outside the scope of the current controls.Should the disclosure describe the policy as fully covering the business, or should it distinguish between direct operations and other relationships?
Model answer. It should distinguish the actual scope from the intended scope. If the policy does not yet reach all activities and business relationships, the disclosure should say so clearly rather than implying full coverage. The wording should match the real extent of application.
Why this matters. Describe the true scope of the policy, including any gaps in coverage.
Analyse this disclosure across real reports
See how companies actually report GRI 101-1 — 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.
→
ESRSRelated
ESRS E4
Biodiversity and Ecosystems — closest topical match (post-Omnibus ESRS catalogue).
→
IFRSNo equivalent
—
No direct IFRS S1/S2 topical equivalent.
Related & explore
Questions this page answers
For GRI 101-1 Biodiversity, what data do I need to gather before I start drafting the disclosure?
The page says to prepare seven datapoints: a biodiversity policy summary, coverage of operations, biodiversity goals and targets, a science basis check, base year start date, base year end date, and progress measures. Use those as your starting checklist before you write the narrative. ↑ section
How do I use the step-by-step preparation section for GRI 101-1 Biodiversity in practice?
Use it as a working sequence rather than a final answer: confirm the scope, gather the listed datapoints, check the science basis, and then turn that into a draft. The page is set up to help you move from raw inputs to a report-ready disclosure. ↑ section
Who should own the GRI 101-1 Biodiversity data collection in my organisation?
The page is aimed at sustainability/ESG managers, HR or data owners, and assurance reviewers, so ownership should sit with whoever can evidence the datapoints and coordinate inputs. The page does not assign roles for you, so you will need to map the listed items to internal owners. ↑ section
What should I include in the evidence pack for GRI 101-1 Biodiversity assurance readiness?
The page provides an evidence pack with five items to support assurance readiness, alongside six assurance claims to verify. Use those materials to assemble the documents and checks that back up the disclosure before review. ↑ section
What are the six assurance claims I need to verify for GRI 101-1 Biodiversity?
The page says there are six assurance claims to verify, each with a claim, risk, and evidence angle. It is designed to help you test whether the disclosure is supported, but you should use the page itself to work through the specific checks. ↑ section
What are the common reporting gaps or mistakes to avoid in a GRI 101-1 Biodiversity draft?
The page lists common reporting gaps and mistakes so you can spot weak points before sign-off. Use that section as a pre-submission review against your scope, targets, base year details, progress measures, and evidence. ↑ section
How do I turn the GRI 101-1 Biodiversity inputs into a draft disclosure?
The page includes draft-output support with visualisation ideas, narrative starters, and a GRI content-index line. That means you can move from the prepared datapoints into a first draft without starting from a blank page. ↑ section
Is there a workbook or download I can use to prepare GRI 101-1 Biodiversity?
Yes. The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format and a printable Library Card in .pdf, which are meant to support preparation and review. ↑ section
Can I use the synthetic example disclosures on the GRI 101-1 Biodiversity page as a template for my own draft?
Yes, but only as an illustrative guide. The examples are synthetic, so they are there to show how a disclosure might look and how the quantitative table can be presented, not to replace your own data. ↑ section
How does the ESRS E4 Biodiversity and Ecosystems reference help me with GRI 101-1 Biodiversity?
The page says ESRS E4 is the closest correspondence, so it can help you think about reusing the same underlying data where relevant. It does not say the requirements are identical, so treat it as a cross-reference rather than a direct match. ↑ section
More questions this page can help with
- GRI 101-1 Biodiversity checklist for sustainability managers
- GRI 101-1 Biodiversity data collection template for policy, targets and progress
- GRI 101-1 Biodiversity scope and coverage of operations guidance
- GRI 101-1 Biodiversity base year start date and end date how to use
- GRI 101-1 Biodiversity science basis check what to prepare
- GRI 101-1 Biodiversity evidence pack for assurance review
- GRI 101-1 Biodiversity common reporting gaps and mistakes
- GRI 101-1 Biodiversity workbook download xlsx
- GRI 101-1 Biodiversity printable library card pdf
- GRI 101-1 Biodiversity synthetic example disclosure table
- GRI 101-1 Biodiversity narrative starters and content index line
- GRI 101-1 Biodiversity ESRS E4 data reuse
✓ 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.
