Standards and reporting
ISSB vs GRI
ISSB and GRI answer different reporting questions, so efficient combined reporting needs separate materiality judgements and carefully checked shared evidence Joint owner statement.
What is the main difference between ISSB and GRI?
ISSB Standards serve investors assessing sustainability-related risks and opportunities affecting an entity’s prospects, while GRI Standards explain significant impacts for a broader stakeholder audience Joint statement: purposes.
Module 01 / 04
ISSB
Explain material information about risks and opportunities affecting cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital.
Module 02 / 04
GRI
Explain significant impacts on the economy, environment and people, including human rights.
Module 03 / 04
Overlap
The same activity can generate an impact and a financial risk, making some evidence useful for both.
Module 04 / 04
Difference
An impact can matter for GRI without the same information being material under ISSB Standards.
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
The question is which information each report needs to communicate rather than which framework has the longer checklist.
Use the standards overview to place both within the wider reporting landscape.
Who is each report designed to inform?
GRI includes investors among its users, but its purpose extends beyond the investor-focused sustainability-related financial information addressed by ISSB Standards Joint statement: audiences.
| Reader question | ISSB focus | GRI focus |
|---|---|---|
| How could this issue affect the business? | Material sustainability-related financial risks and opportunities | Relevant context where it helps explain impacts |
| Who or what could the business affect? | Impacts where they provide material investor information about entity risks and opportunities | Significant impacts on the economy, environment and people |
| Can an investor use both? | Yes, for the investor-focused purpose | Yes, including where the investor has interests beyond financial returns alone |
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
Do not reduce the comparison to investors versus everyone else because investors can also use impact information.
How does materiality change the reporting decision?
GRI material topics follow significant impacts, while ISSB reporting asks whether information about sustainability risks and opportunities is material for investors assessing the entity GRI 3: material topics Joint statement: complementary disclosures.
Module 01 / 04
Impact
Identify actual or potential effects on people, the environment or the economy.
Module 02 / 04
Financial channel
Investigate how an issue could affect business prospects without assuming every impact has the same financial significance.
Module 03 / 04
Evidence
Retain the reasoning and supporting information for each reporting lens.
Module 04 / 04
Conclusion
Record different conclusions where the two purposes lead to different disclosure decisions.
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
GRI represents the impact side of a double-materiality approach rather than requiring a separate financial-materiality assessment under GRI itself GRI 3: material topics.
A combined workshop can gather shared evidence while keeping the two conclusions distinct.
Can the same issue lead to different disclosures?
This fictional manufacturer illustrates the questions each reporting lens prompts rather than determining a real company’s materiality.
| Fictional issue | Impact reporting investigation | Financial reporting investigation |
|---|---|---|
| Water withdrawal near a stressed catchment | Effects on water availability and affected communities | Production interruption, input costs and investment needs |
| A supply-chain labour concern | Potential harm to workers and management of that harm | Supply continuity, customer contracts and legal exposure |
| Extreme weather exposure | Any relevant impacts associated with the company’s activities and response | Asset damage, insurance, operational disruption and resilience |
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
The joint owners explicitly recognise that sustainability-related financial risks can arise without originating in an entity’s own impacts Joint statement: complementary disclosures.
Do not invent a numerical cut-off and present it as a universal rule for either framework.
What do the reporting systems contain?
IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 provide the ISSB general and climate reporting standards, while GRI uses Universal, Sector and Topic Standards IFRS S1 implementation IFRS S2 implementation GRI 1: system of standards.
Module 01 / 04
General basis
IFRS S1 supplies the general sustainability-related financial disclosure framework.
Module 02 / 04
Climate
IFRS S2 addresses climate-related disclosures within the ISSB reporting framework.
Module 03 / 04
GRI foundation
GRI 1 establishes how the GRI Standards are used and how reporting claims are made.
Module 04 / 04
GRI selection
GRI 2, GRI 3 and relevant Sector and Topic Standards supply context, material-topic disclosures and topic information.
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
The GRI Standards guide explains the two formal GRI reporting routes.
The SASB Standards guide explains industry guidance relevant to IFRS S1 rather than treating SASB as another name for the full ISSB framework.
Which information can be collected once?
A common source record can support both reporting workstreams when definitions and reporting boundaries are checked separately rather than assumed identical Joint statement: common disclosures.
| Record | Potential shared use | Separate check |
|---|---|---|
| Energy activity data | Operational evidence for climate and impact reporting | Entity boundary, units, reporting period and conversion method |
| Workforce records | Evidence of workforce context or a relevant risk | Population, worker definition and reporting purpose |
| Transition-plan documents | Source information about actions and decisions | Impact disclosures versus risk-and-opportunity disclosures |
| Governance records | Evidence of responsibilities and review | Specific disclosure questions and reporting locations |
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
Store the underlying source once where practical and preserve each standard-specific transformation.
A shared database does not remove the need to explain why the information belongs in each report.
What is actually equivalent for GHG emissions?
The June 2025 statement permits equivalent IFRS S2 Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 disclosures to meet corresponding GRI 102 requirements when its measurement and content-index conditions are met GHG equivalence statement: section 4.
Module 01 / 04
Measurement
Measure emissions using the GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard 2004.
Module 02 / 04
Location
Include the required references in the GRI content index so each disclosure can be found.
Module 03 / 04
Scope
The statement concerns corresponding emissions disclosures rather than every climate or sustainability requirement.
Module 04 / 04
Timing
Distinguish early adoption of GRI 102 from its effective reporting date.
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
The statement does not say that an entire IFRS S2 report automatically satisfies every GRI 102 requirement Joint statement: emissions disclosure scope.
Check the Scope 2 guide before assuming that two similarly labelled electricity totals have identical accounting bases.
Why does the version of the GRI climate standard matter?
The January 2024 resource addressed GRI 305 and IFRS S2, while the June 2025 equivalence statement addresses the new GRI 102 climate standard 2024 resource scope 2025 statement scope.
| Resource | What it addresses | How to use it |
|---|---|---|
| January 2024 emissions resource | GRI 305 and IFRS S2 considerations | Read as a dated comparison of those materials |
| June 2025 equivalence statement | Corresponding GRI 102 / IFRS S2 emissions disclosures | Check the specific conditions before reusing disclosures |
| May 2026 joint statement | Distinct purposes, common information and complementary disclosures | Use to frame the overall reporting approach |
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
GRI 102: Climate Change 2025 becomes effective for reports published from 1 January 2027, with early adoption available in the GRI system GRI climate standards development GRI 1: effective dates.
What climate information still needs separate attention?
The owners describe transition planning, adaptation and just-transition information as potentially complementary because the two reporting purposes differ Joint statement: complementary disclosure examples.
Module 01 / 04
Transition planning
Explain the relevant investor information alongside significant impacts associated with the transition.
Module 02 / 04
Adaptation
Consider the business exposure and the effects that adaptation actions can have on people and the environment.
Module 03 / 04
Workforce change
Investigate transition-related workforce impacts and the financial risks or opportunities they may create.
Module 04 / 04
Judgement
Test what each standard actually requires rather than merging paragraphs solely because their headings match.
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
A management paper may be the shared evidence source while the published explanations answer different questions.
Retain the separate requirement references and reviewer decisions in the drafting record.
Can you make one statement covering both frameworks?
GRI and ISSB reporting claims have their own requirements, so a report should substantiate each claim rather than use a vague combined alignment statement GRI 1: reporting routes Distinct standards and due processes.
| Proposed wording | Review question | Editorial response |
|---|---|---|
| GRI and ISSB aligned | What exact reporting basis and claim is intended? | Name the applicable standards and route |
| A GRI content index is present | Are the other requirements of the selected GRI route met? | Review the complete claim rather than just the index |
| ISSB disclosures reused | Do the reused disclosures meet the corresponding GRI requirement and conditions? | Document the match and any remaining gap |
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
GRI expressly states that it does not certify or verify sustainability reports GRI reporting-claims policy.
How should one reporting team organise both workstreams?
Use a shared evidence register with separate disclosure decisions and version references so that efficient collection does not blur the reporting purposes.
Module 01 / 04
Requirement
Identify the exact question, source standard and version.
Module 02 / 04
Evidence
Link the source data, methodology, uncertainty and responsible owner.
Module 03 / 04
Decision
Record the materiality and applicability judgement for each reporting basis.
Module 04 / 04
Publication
Link the approved wording to its final report location and any index entry.
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
This is an editorial operating model rather than a prescribed reporting-system architecture.
Use reporting software to test the export and review trail, or define a consultancy brief around the unresolved work.
What should a mapping or software demonstration prove?
Require an example that traces a shared input into distinct disclosures and exposes any mismatch rather than accepting an unsupported whole-framework mapping claim.
| Demonstration task | Inspect | Useful failure test |
|---|---|---|
| Map a shared data point | Definition, period and boundary | Change one boundary and inspect the impact |
| Reuse an emissions disclosure | Measurement basis and index reference | Remove a condition and check the flagged gap |
| Update a standard | Issued version versus draft content | Check whether old mappings remain identifiable |
| Export the evidence | Owner, reviewer and publication location | Read the export without access to the platform |
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
GRI’s taxonomy supports structured digital reporting, but technical output does not by itself establish the substantive reporting claim GRI digital reporting tools.
Should a company choose ISSB, GRI or both?
Begin with applicable obligations, information users and the intended reporting claim, then assess whether using both serves a genuine reporting need Joint statement: reporting purposes.
Module 01 / 04
Obligations
Identify the actual legal or contractual reporting basis for the entity and period.
Module 02 / 04
Audience
Record who needs the information and what decisions it should support.
Module 03 / 04
Evidence
Assess the data and judgement gaps for each proposed reporting route.
Module 04 / 04
Capacity
Prioritise reviewable reporting rather than accumulating unsupported claims.
Read the detailed guidance and evidence
The owners have collaborated since their 2022 memorandum while continuing to make standards decisions separately 2022 collaboration 2026 statement: ongoing work.
UK reporters should also read the UK SRS guide because the UK text needs its own assessment rather than being treated as identical to IFRS S1 and IFRS S2.
How can the reporting team put this into practice?
This nine-stage editorial workflow helps organise preparation and review without creating a statutory timetable.
- 101
Identify the reporting basis
Record obligations, audiences, reporting period and intended claims. - 202
Read current standards
Save issued versions and distinguish them from proposals or older mappings. - 303
Map the business
Identify activities, relationships and relevant risk and impact evidence. - 404
Keep judgements separate
Document impact and investor-materiality decisions for the respective purposes. - 505
Design shared records
Reuse genuine common inputs while retaining distinct definitions and boundaries. - 606
Test the GHG conditions
Check measurement and GRI index references before claiming permitted reuse. - 707
Draft complementary information
Explain the additional disclosures needed for each reporting purpose. - 808
Review the claims
Check evidence, final locations and the exact language of each reporting claim. - 909
Retain and update
Keep the comparison record and review issued changes for the next cycle.
Frequently asked
Questions people ask
Is GRI the same as ISSB?
No, they have distinct purposes, audiences and standards-setting processes.
Does GRI require double materiality?
GRI focuses on significant impacts and does not make financial materiality a condition for reporting a material topic.
Can the same emissions data support both?
Potentially, but reuse under the GRI 102 equivalence mechanism requires its specified measurement basis and content-index references.
Does IFRS S2 automatically meet every GRI requirement?
No, the joint statement addresses corresponding emissions disclosures and also identifies complementary information needed for different purposes.
Do companies need two separate data systems?
A shared evidence system can be an editorially useful approach if it preserves definitions, reporting boundaries and distinct review decisions.
Does a GRI content index prove ISSB compliance?
No, a content index supports the GRI reporting route and does not establish that a separate ISSB reporting basis has been met.
Sources
Primary sources
Primary provisions and official owner guidance checked on 26 October 2026; historical and draft resources are labelled in the guide.
- IFRS Foundation / Global Reporting InitiativeMay 2026 joint statement: distinct purposes, common and complementary disclosures
- IFRS Foundation / Global Reporting InitiativeGRI 102 / IFRS S2: June 2025 statement, section 4
- IFRS FoundationIFRS S1 supporting implementation
- IFRS FoundationIFRS S2 supporting implementation
- Global Reporting InitiativeGRI 1: Foundation 2021
- Global Reporting InitiativeGRI 3: Material Topics 2021
- Global Reporting InitiativeGRI 2: General Disclosures 2021
- IFRS FoundationJanuary 2024 GHG interoperability resource announcement
- IFRS Foundation2022 IFRS Foundation–GRI collaboration agreement
- Global Reporting InitiativeGRI Climate Change and Energy standards development
- Global Reporting InitiativeGRI copyright and reporting certification policy
- Global Reporting InitiativeGRI Sustainability Taxonomy