The first step G4 requires is a systematic materiality assessment followed by disclosure of what those material topics are. This page location is: The process by which the relative priority of Aspects was determined should be explained. Re the matrix - I don't suggest we marginalize impact significance - I just do not find evidence in most of the materiality matrices that I view of a clear process for defining what's most significant relativity of material significance and what that actually means for the company.
While materiality is not new, the G4 framework more explicitly requires reporting efforts to center on materiality -- impacts, risks and opportunities. The first step G4 requires is a systematic materiality assessment followed by disclosure of what those material topics are. A company now has two options levels for reporting "in accordance with" the GRI guidelines: The most substantial difference between a core and a comprehensive report will be the number of governance and strategy disclosures.
It will now be easier for readers to determine what specifically has been assured within a report. Interestingly, the guidance GRI gives for the assurance process has not changed. The framework still recommends that assurance providers assess reports for adherence to the GRI principles which have also remained unchanged. G4 is consolidated into two "books. Book 2 is an implementation manual containing the guidance for material topics.
As our new friend Suzi Ibbotson from Lodestar , a U. There are now two types of Disclosures on Management Approach. The General DMA asks companies to disclose three basic items for the organization's material topics. The power of the GRI framework is its ability to prompt internal conversations that otherwise would not have occurred.
However, companies were often overwhelmed by the number of options provided within the guidelines. They thought it was required to answer every question or report every metric described. G4 literally draws a line between the requirements and the guidance so that companies can understand the purpose of the materials in the framework. In G4, a company determines its boundary during the materiality assessment.
In contrast, lack of impact is the only thing that can exclude an entity from a company's boundary in G4. Scope is a question about impact, risk and opportunity, and a company's boundary may be different for each material topic because the entities a company impacts may be different for every reporting topic.
The G4 Governance disclosures required for a comprehensive report are vast and deep. The report should cover Aspects that: Organizations are faced with a wide range of topics on which they could report. Materiality is the threshold at which Aspects become sufficiently important that they should be reported. Beyond this threshold, not all material Aspects are of equal importance and the emphasis within a report should reflect the relative priority of these material Aspects.
The concept of a threshold is also important in sustainability reporting, but it is concerned with a wider range of impacts and stakeholders. Materiality for sustainability reporting is not limited only to those Aspects that have a significant financial impact on the organization.
Determining materiality for a sustainability report also includes considering economic, environmental and social impacts that cross a threshold in affecting the ability to meet the needs of the present without compromising the needs of future generations. These material Aspects often have a significant financial impact in the short term or long term on an organization. They are therefore also relevant for stakeholders who focus strictly on the financial condition of an organization.
Assessments of materiality should also take into account the basic expectations expressed in the international standards and agreements with which the organization is expected to comply. These internal and external factors should be considered when evaluating the importance of information for reflecting significant economic, environmental and social impacts, or stakeholder decision making.
A range of established methodologies may be used to assess the significance of impacts. Impacts that are considered important enough to require active management or engagement by the organization are likely to be considered to be significant. The report should emphasize information on performance regarding the most material Aspects.
Other relevant topics can be included, but should be given less prominence in the report.
Materiality is the threshold at which Aspects become sufficiently important that they should be reported. Beyond this threshold, not all material Aspects are of equal importance and the emphasis within a report should reflect the relative priority of these material Aspects. GRI Standards have superseded the G4 Guidelines, which have been phased out on June 30th The use of the GRI Standards will be required for all reports or other materials published on or after July 1st The GRI Services Team only accepts service applications for GRI Standards reports. May 24, · As I reflect on the proceedings here in Amsterdam, less than 24 hours after the official release of the new GRI G4 guidelines, the underlying theme is clear: it’s all about materiality. Regardless of whether you seek the “core” or “comprehensive” in accordance with GRI option (which replaces the A, B or C levels), the new/enhanced .