Choosing the Right Report Framework(s)

Choosing a sustainability reporting framework is one of the most important early decisions in the reporting process. It shapes how you collect data, structure your report, and communicate your impact — both internally and externally.

There’s no one-size-fits-all approach. In fact, most organizations use more than one framework. The key is to know your goals, audience, and capacity — and build from there.

The Four Pillars of Sustainability Reporting

Before diving into specific frameworks, it's helpful to understand the common structure of most sustainability and impact reports. Nearly all are organized around four thematic pillars:

1. Environmental

Focuses on how your organization affects (and responds to) the natural environment.

Topics may include:

• Energy consumption and efficiency
• Greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1, 2, and 3)
• Water usage and management
• Waste production and recycling
• Biodiversity and ecosystem impacts

Framework alignment:

GRI Standards (300 series), SASB environmental metrics, and TCFD’s climate disclosures all emphasize these topics.

2. Social

Covers relationships with employees, communities, and customers.

Topics may include:

• Labor practices and working conditions
• Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)
• Human rights in the supply chain
• Community engagement and investment
• Product safety and customer responsibility

Framework alignment:

GRI (400 series), SASB’s sector-specific social topics, and B Impact Assessment all emphasize social metrics.

3. Governance

Deals with internal systems of accountability, ethics, and oversight.

Topics may include:

• Board structure and sustainability oversight
• Anti-corruption and business ethics
• Executive compensation linked to ESG goals
• Risk management systems
• Data privacy and cybersecurity

Framework alignment:

GRI (102 and 200 series), SASB governance indicators, and TCFD governance disclosures.

4. Economic

Reflects your contribution to financial sustainability and local economic development.

Topics may include:

• Economic value created and distributed
• Local procurement and job creation
• Business continuity and resilience
• Tax transparency and fair contribution

Framework alignment:

GRI (201 series), SASB financial metrics, and the Integrated Reporting framework.

Overview of Key Reporting Frameworks

Below is a detailed look at the most commonly used sustainability and impact reporting frameworks.

Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)

The most widely adopted sustainability reporting framework. GRI is designed for transparency across economic, environmental, and social impacts, intended for a broad set of stakeholders — not just investors.

• Modular design: Universal Standards (basic disclosures), Sector Standards (industry-specific), and Topic Standards (e.g. emissions, labor, tax)
• Encourages organizations to report on their most material impacts (those most significant to society and the environment)
• Ideal for organizations seeking a holistic, stakeholder-centered report
• Can serve as a foundational framework, often supplemented by others (like SASB or SDGs)

✅ Use GRI if you want a full-spectrum report that shows accountability to employees, communities, and the public.

Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB)

SASB (now part of the ISSB) focuses on financial materiality — the ESG topics most likely to impact financial performance. It offers industry-specific standards for 77 sectors, each with defined metrics.

• Designed to produce comparable, decision-useful data for investors
• Often used alongside GRI: GRI for breadth, SASB for financial relevance
• Key topics are determined by materiality to enterprise value, not just social impact
• Widely adopted by public companies, particularly those under investor pressure to disclose ESG risk

✅ Use SASB if you’re a public or investor-facing company, especially in a high-impact sector (like energy, manufacturing, or tech).

Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)

TCFD is focused specifically on climate-related risks and opportunities. It provides a structured approach to disclosing how climate change might affect your business — and how your business is managing that risk.

• Organized around four pillars: Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, and Metrics & Targets
• Includes disclosures such as board oversight, scenario planning, carbon accounting
• Widely endorsed and becoming mandatory in several countries (e.g. the UK, EU, Japan)
• Often integrated into larger reports (either ESG or sustainability)

✅ Use TCFD if climate risk is material to your business — or if investors, regulators, or clients expect this level of disclosure.

B Corp & B Impact Assessment (BIA)

Used by certified B Corporations or values-led companies, the B Impact Assessment measures ESG performance across five categories: governance, workers, community, environment, and customers.

• Free to use and publicly available
• Required annually for B Corp certification
• Focuses on mission alignment and stakeholder value rather than financial risk
• Often includes both qualitative storytelling and quantitative metrics
• Particularly helpful for nonprofits, social enterprises, and startups with purpose-driven models

✅ Use BIA if you’re a mission-driven organization or pursuing B Corp certification — or want a structured but approachable impact lens.

United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs)

The SDGs are not a reporting standard, but a global reference framework. Many organizations map their work to relevant SDG targets to show alignment with global priorities (e.g. climate, equity, health, justice).

• Aspirational and flexible
• Easily combined with other frameworks like GRI or BIA
• Useful for public-facing messaging or visual storytelling
• Many reports use icons or indexes to show SDG alignment by topic or goal

✅ Use the SDGs if you want to show how your efforts contribute to big-picture change — especially in communications or program areas.

Mixing and Matching Frameworks

You don’t have to choose just one. In fact, many organizations mix and match based on:

• Audience expectations (investors, customers, community)
• Regulatory context (e.g. CSRD in the EU, SEC in the US)
• Type of organization (corporate, nonprofit, startup)
• Available resources and reporting maturity

Common combinations:

• GRI + SASB + TCFD = For large or public companies balancing breadth and financial disclosure
• BIA + SDGs = For B Corps or social enterprises focused on impact and alignment
• GRI + SDGs = For nonprofits or community-focused orgs that want structure and storytelling
• GRI + TCFD = For companies with environmental risk exposure (e.g. food, transport, manufacturing)

When (and Why) to Commit to One Framework

You may want to fully follow a framework if:

• Your industry expects it (e.g. TCFD in financial services)
• You’re pursuing certification (e.g. B Corp, UN Global Compact)
• You want to say the report is “in accordance with GRI” — which has specific format and disclosure requirements
• You’re preparing for third-party assurance (auditing of data or processes)

Even then, you can still pull in elements from other frameworks to enrich your report.

In a nutshell

GRI

Primary Strength: Broad ESG disclosures for all stakeholders

Best For: Any organization aiming for transparency and completeness

SASB/ISSB

Primary Strength: Industry-specific metrics tied to financial risk

Best For: Investor-facing reports, especially for public companies

TCFD

Primary Strength: Climate risk and scenario analysis

Best For: Climate-exposed sectors, regulated industries

BIA (B Corp)

Primary Strength: Stakeholder-driven holistic impact

Best For: Mission-driven orgs, B Corps, social enterprises

UN SDGs

Primary Strength: Global development goal alignment

Best For: Public engagement, social impact storytelling

Bottom Line

Think of frameworks like tools — not rulebooks. The goal is not to tick boxes but to communicate clearly, credibly, and consistently.

Start with what matters most to your organization and stakeholders. Then use the frameworks that help you structure and support that message — without overcomplicating the process.