IFRS S1
General requirements for every material sustainability-related risk and opportunity.
¶¶1–86, Appendices A–E.The global baseline · IFRS S1 and IFRS S2
The ISSB framework: what it is, who governs it, and how it reached the UK
The ISSB framework is the global baseline for sustainability reporting to investors: two standards from the International Sustainability Standards Board, IFRS S1 and IFRS S2, and the industry material behind them.
Those two are the ISSB standards, formally the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards.
The standard question is settled; the mandate question is not, and it is answered country by country.
In the UK it now has an answer for listed companies: the FCA’s final rules in PS26/19 require them to report against the UK versions on a comply-or-explain basis from 2027.
In plain words
What the ISSB framework is
The ISSB framework is two standards — IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 — and the architecture around them.
The Board was announced on 3 November 2021 at COP26 in Glasgow and issued both standards in June 2023.
Read what “framework” covers
The word “framework” does some work: the ISSB publishes standards, not a single document called the ISSB Framework.
What the market means is the whole set — the standards, the four pillars they are organised around, the SASB industry material they refer to, and the jurisdictional machinery that turns any of it into a duty.
The audience is the design choice everything else follows from: the ISSB asks what a reasonable investor needs to judge an entity’s prospects, not what a wider public might want to know.
The Board sits inside the IFRS Foundation, which says it “operates alongside—but independently from—the IASB” (who we are).
That is why a decision on accounting standards does not bind the sustainability board, and why the bare word “IFRS” is ambiguous between the two.
The paragraph-level reading of each standard is on IFRS S1 and IFRS S2; the wider set of rulebooks is mapped separately.
The framework, in four partsExplore
The framework, in four parts
Four pillars
Governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets, inherited from the TCFD.
The guides
Where is each part of the ISSB framework explained?
Each standard, each UK question and each comparison has its own page.
| Question | Where it is answered |
|---|---|
| What do the two standards say, together? | The ISSB standards |
| How do IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 differ? | IFRS S1 and S2 compared |
| What does IFRS S1 require, paragraph by paragraph? | IFRS S1 |
| What does IFRS S2 require, paragraph by paragraph? | IFRS S2 |
| What applies to a UK company, and how does UK SRS relate? | ISSB reporting requirements in the UK |
| Which countries have adopted them? | ISSB adoption by jurisdiction |
| When do they take effect? | IFRS S1 and S2 effective date |
| What are the four pillars? | The ISSB four pillars |
| What is the ISSB doing on nature? | ISSB nature-related disclosures |
| What must software do to support them? | IFRS sustainability reporting software |
| How do CSRD and ISSB differ? | CSRD vs ISSB |
| How do ISSB and GRI differ? | ISSB vs GRI |
| What changed from the TCFD? | IFRS S2 vs TCFD |
Lineage
A consolidation, not an invention
The IFRS Foundation says the ISSB builds on the work of the CDSB, the TCFD, the Value Reporting Foundation’s Integrated Reporting Framework and the industry-based SASB Standards, together with the World Economic Forum’s Stakeholder Capitalism Metrics.
Before 2021 a preparer chose between four or five overlapping voluntary frameworks; after 2023 there is one investor-facing baseline, and the others are inside it or aimed at a different audience.
The sequence is short enough to recite, which is what makes it dangerous: formed 2021, standards issued June 2023, IFRS S2 effective for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2024.
That last date belongs to IFRS S2 and to nothing else — the phrase “effective date” does not appear in either UK standard.
- December 201501
The FSB creates the TCFD
Its Final Report, June 2017, sets out the four recommendations. - 3 November 202102
ISSB announced at COP26
Building on the CDSB, the TCFD, the Integrated Reporting Framework and the SASB Standards. - 31 January 202203
- August 202204
Value Reporting Foundation consolidated
The ISSB becomes responsible for the SASB Standards. - June 202305
- 12 October 202306
- December 202507
The framework comparison for UK readers is on ESG frameworks in the UK.
Governance
Who governs the ISSB: Trustees, Monitoring Board and due process
The ISSB is a board, not an organisation; it sits inside a three-tier structure the IFRS Foundation describes in its own words.
The Trustees appoint the Board, and the Monitoring Board approves the Trustees; neither writes a standard.
Read the governance detail
| Tier | What it does |
|---|---|
| Two boards — IASB and ISSB | Write the standards, independently, through due process. |
| IFRS Foundation Trustees | Governance and strategy; maintain the Constitution and Due Process Handbook; appoint board members; funding. |
| Monitoring Board | Public authorities. Created January 2009 as a formal link between the Trustees and public authorities; approves Trustee appointments. |
In May 2023 the Monitoring Board and the Trustees updated their memorandum of understanding to reflect the creation of the ISSB as a sister board to the IASB.
The Board’s votes are recorded at the end of each standard: IFRS S1 was approved for issue by all 14 members in June 2023, and the December 2025 amendments to IFRS S2 by 11 of the 12, one being absent.
At its meeting of 21 July 2026 all 12 members confirmed due process had been met on the nature exposure draft.
Due process is what makes the output a standard rather than an opinion: both boards’ standards go through the same public consultation before issue.
The ISSB’s stated objectives are a global baseline, investors’ information needs, comprehensive information for capital markets, and interoperability with jurisdiction-specific and broader-stakeholder reporting.
Backing from the G7, the G20, IOSCO and the Financial Stability Board explains why jurisdictions adopt; it is not itself a legal requirement anywhere.
The EU’s standard-setting runs differently: EFRAG advises on the ESRS and the Commission adopts them as delegated regulations; neither step has legal effect in the UK.
Who governs the ISSBExplore
Who governs the ISSB
The ISSB
Writes the sustainability standards through due process, independently from the IASB.
Who governs the ISSB
Trustees
Governance and strategy; the Constitution and Due Process Handbook; appoint board members.
Who governs the ISSB
Monitoring Board
Public authorities; created January 2009; approves Trustee appointments.
Who governs the ISSB
Votes
IFRS S1 approved by all 14 members; the December 2025 IFRS S2 amendments by 11 of 12.
The two standards
IFRS S1 is the shape of the report; IFRS S2 is one topic in detail
IFRS S1 governs how an entity identifies, measures and presents sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect its prospects — every topic, climate included.
IFRS S2, in the Foundation’s words, “integrates and builds on the recommendations of the TCFD and incorporates industry-based disclosure requirements derived from SASB Standards”.
The two are designed to be applied together: IFRS S1 may be applied early only alongside IFRS S2, so the general standard cannot be used to avoid the climate one.
Read the two standards side by side
| IFRS S1 | IFRS S2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Covers | Every material sustainability-related risk and opportunity | Climate-related risks and opportunities |
| Text | ¶¶1–86, Appendices A–E | ¶¶1–37, Appendices A–C |
| Distinctive content | Materiality, connected information, sources of guidance, compliance statement | Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions; scenario analysis; industry-based metrics |
| Early application | Only with IFRS S2 at the same time | With IFRS S1, insofar as it relates to climate |
Both are readable in full without paying or registering: the paragraph-numbered text is served openly by the Foundation, and only the PDFs on the navigator need registration.
Conceptual foundations
Does the ISSB have a conceptual framework?
Not as a separate document: IFRS S1 opens with a section headed “Conceptual foundations”, and borrows its qualitative characteristics from the IASB.
IFRS S1’s contents list the section as “Conceptual foundations”, paragraphs 10 to 24 (IFRS S1).
Appendix D says the Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting was issued by the IASB, and that its qualitative characteristics apply to sustainability-related financial information because both sit in general purpose financial reports (IFRS S1 ¶¶D1–D2).
So the “ISSB conceptual framework” is IFRS S1’s foundations plus the IASB’s characteristics: relevance and faithful representation first, then comparability, verifiability, timeliness and understandability.
UK SRS S1 keeps the same paragraphs 10 to 24, and the FCA’s guidance names them among the parts a listed company applies even under the climate-first relief (PS26/19, UKLR 6.6.6A G).
IFRS S1 ¶¶10–24Explore
IFRS S1 ¶¶10–24
Fair presentation
A complete set of disclosures presents fairly every sustainability-related risk and opportunity that could reasonably be expected to affect prospects.
IFRS S1 ¶¶10–24
Materiality
Disclose material information about those risks and opportunities.
IFRS S1 ¶¶10–24
Reporting entity
The same reporting entity as the related financial statements.
IFRS S1 ¶¶10–24
Connected information
Connections between the items, and between the disclosures and the financial statements.
The pillars
Four pillars, eleven disclosures beneath them
Governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets: every disclosure in the ISSB framework hangs off one of the four.
All four are inherited — they are the TCFD’s recommendations, set out at Figure 4 of the June 2017 Final Report.
Beneath them sit eleven recommended disclosures: two under governance and three under each of the others.
The October 2021 update changed the guidance and expressly did not modify the four or the eleven (2021 Annex); the full text remains on the TCFD’s frozen site.
One asymmetry survives into the ISSB framework: “where such information is material” qualifies strategy and metrics and targets, not governance or risk management.
And after October 2021 the TCFD asked for GHG emissions independent of a materiality assessment (metrics, targets and transition plans guidance) — a position the ISSB kept.
The explorer filters the eleven by pillar and by that materiality wording; the four pillars as they apply in UK reporting are on climate-related financial disclosures.
The eleven, filtered
Pillar
Materiality wording on the recommendation
- Governance (a)
Describe the board’s oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities.
No materiality wording on this pillar. UK SRS S2 governance begins at ¶5.
- Governance (b)
Describe management’s role in assessing and managing climate-related risks and opportunities.
No materiality wording on this pillar.
- Strategy (a)
Describe the climate-related risks and opportunities the organization has identified over the short, medium, and long term.
The recommendation carries “where such information is material”. UK SRS S2 strategy begins at ¶8.
- Strategy (b)
Describe the impact of climate-related risks and opportunities on the organization’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning.
Material-gated through the recommendation.
- Strategy (c)
Describe the resilience of the organization’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate-related scenarios, including a 2°C or lower scenario.
The 2016 draft lacked “resilience” and “or lower”. UK SRS S2 ¶22 asks for an approach commensurate with the entity’s circumstances.
- Risk management (a)
Describe the organization’s processes for identifying and assessing climate-related risks.
No materiality wording on this pillar. UK SRS S2 risk management begins at ¶24.
- Risk management (b)
Describe the organization’s processes for managing climate-related risks.
No materiality wording on this pillar.
- Risk management (c)
Describe how processes for identifying, assessing, and managing climate-related risks are integrated into the organization’s overall risk management.
No materiality wording on this pillar.
- Metrics and targets (a)
Disclose the metrics used by the organization to assess climate-related risks and opportunities in line with its strategy and risk management process.
Material-gated through the recommendation. The 2021 guidance adds seven cross-industry metric categories. UK SRS S2 metrics begin at ¶27.
- Metrics and targets (b)
Disclose Scope 1, Scope 2, and, if appropriate, Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the related risks.
October 2021: GHG emissions independent of a materiality assessment. UK SRS S2 ¶29(a)(i)(3) requires Scope 3, with the untimed ¶C4 relief.
- Metrics and targets (c)
Describe the targets used by the organization to manage climate-related risks and opportunities and performance against targets.
Material-gated through the recommendation.
11 of 11 shown.
Text: TCFD Final Report, June 2017, Figure 4, p.
14.
UK SRS S2 paragraph references: DBT, 25 February 2026.
How does one sustainability issue connect the ISSB’s four pillars?
The four pillars describe connected information about the same risk or opportunity, rather than four unrelated sections filled independently.
| Fictional manufacturer: unreliable water supply | Question for the disclosure | Evidence to connect |
|---|---|---|
| Governance and strategy | Who oversees the issue, and how could it affect operations and prospects? | The responsible body, decisions and the affected sites or activities |
| Risk management | How is the issue identified, assessed, prioritised and monitored? | The assessment method and its connection to existing risk processes |
| Metrics and targets | How is performance monitored and progress assessed? | The chosen measure, its method and any relevant target, with limitations |
The company and issue are fictional; no financial materiality conclusion or water-risk score is assumed.
The issue enters the ISSB disclosure assessment because of its potential effect on prospects, not merely because it has an environmental label.
The financial-materiality guide explains that test, while the separate nature framework can help develop evidence about dependencies and impacts.
Materiality
Financial materiality, not double materiality
This is the single most consequential thing to get right about the ISSB framework, and the one most often stated backwards.
The framework applies financial materiality: information is in scope when it could reasonably be expected to affect the entity’s cash flows, its access to finance or its cost of capital.
It asks about the world’s effect on the company; the European regime also asks about the company’s effect on the world.
The ISSB and GRI have said so jointly: ISSB Standards require information about impacts “only in so far as this provides material information for investors with respect to sustainability-related risks and opportunities for the entity” (joint statement, 26 May 2026).
GRI occupies the other half: its own guide says its standards represent the impact side of double materiality and attributes the term to the European Union (GRI on double materiality).
So neither GRI nor the ISSB is a double-materiality standard on its own; the EU regime is the one that asks both questions.
In the UK the same test is single (financial) materiality under UK SRS S1, which may consider the GRI Standards and the ESRS as sources of guidance (UK SRS S1 ¶C2) without importing double materiality.
The comparer beside this text applies each test to one matter; the long form is on double materiality.
One matter, four tests
Answer both to see how each regime treats the matter.
Tests: Directive 2013/34/EU Art 19a(1) and CSRD recital 29 (either perspective); revised ESRS 1 ¶24 (immaterial information not disclosed); UK SRS S1 ¶¶3, 18; GRI 1 §2.2; EFRAG’s ESRS-40a exposure draft.
You make the two judgements; this applies each regime’s test to them.
Nothing is stored or sent.
Consolidation
Four bodies, four different fates
Disbanded, consolidated and absorbed are not synonyms, and conflating them is the commonest error in this subject.
The material of the consolidated bodies is still published and maintained; consolidation is not withdrawal.
Read the four fates in full
| Body | What happened | When | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| TCFD | Disbanded, having fulfilled its remit. A monitoring duty — not a body of work — passed on from 2024; the FSB names the ISSB and the Foundation’s own material uses both nouns. | 12 October 2023 | FSB |
| Climate Disclosure Standards Board | Consolidated into the IFRS Foundation to support the new ISSB; it produces no further work. | 31 January 2022 | IFRS Foundation |
| Value Reporting Foundation (SASB Standards and the Integrated Reporting Framework) | Consolidated into the IFRS Foundation; the ISSB became responsible for the SASB Standards. | August 2022 | IFRS Foundation |
| Integrated Reporting and Connectivity Council | Wound up at the end of its term; its mandate transferred to the IFRS Advisory Council. The Integrated Reporting Framework itself is untouched. | 31 July 2026 | AC8, April 2026 |
The errors run in both directions: the Integrated Reporting Framework was not withdrawn and was never made a standard, and the IRCC was not abolished.
The Foundation describes integrated reporting as now “permanently embedded within the Foundation’s core operations”.
The Foundation’s TCFD page gives the successor owner’s account; the UK consequences of the TCFD’s end are on TCFD to UK SRS migration.
Four fatesExplore
Four fates
VRF and SASB
Consolidated, August 2022; the ISSB became responsible for the SASB Standards.
Four fates
IRCC
Wound up at the end of its term; mandate to the IFRS Advisory Council, 31 July 2026.
Industry material
The SASB Standards, and how binding they are
The SASB Standards are the industry-specific layer, and the ISSB has been responsible for them since the August 2022 consolidation.
There are 77 industries across 11 sectors, classified under SICS, which the Board decided in May 2024 to retain.
The version stamp is no longer uniform: most carry 2023-12, effective for periods beginning on or after 1 January 2025; three financial-sector standards carry 2025-12, effective 1 January 2027.
How binding the material is depends on which text you apply, and this is the sharpest UK divergence there is.
Read the verb in each text
IFRS S1 ¶55(a): an entity “shall refer to and consider the applicability of” the SASB disclosure topics.
UK SRS S1 ¶55(a): “may”. ¶59(a) still requires the entity to say which SASB topics it used.
The UK softened “shall” to “may” at some paragraphs and not others, and Annex A records each; the duty to disclose which SASB topics were applied was not softened at all.
The paragraph-by-paragraph map is on SASB Standards, and the ESG standards page places SASB among the other frameworks.
The IFRS Foundation’s own guidance says each company is responsible for deciding which disclosure topics apply to its business; how its Materiality Finder supports that is on the SASB materiality map.
The SASB layerExplore
The SASB layer
IFRS S1 ¶55(a)
An entity “shall refer to and consider the applicability of” the SASB disclosure topics.
The SASB layer
UK SRS S1 ¶55(a)
“May”; ¶59(a) still requires the entity to say which SASB topics it used.
The SASB layer
Versions
Mostly 2023-12; three financial-sector standards carry 2025-12, effective 1 January 2027.
Against TCFD
What changed between the TCFD and IFRS S2
| TCFD (2017, guidance updated 2021) | IFRS S2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Status | Recommendations from a task force | A standard, capable of being written into law |
| Scope 3 | “If appropriate” (Metrics and Targets b) | Required, across the fifteen GHG Protocol categories, subject to transitional relief |
| Measurement basis | Left to the preparer | GHG Protocol Corporate Standard, unless a jurisdiction or exchange requires otherwise |
| Industry metrics | Supplemental guidance for some sectors | Required, drawing on the SASB-derived Industry-based Guidance |
| GHG and materiality | From 2021, emissions disclosed independent of materiality | Kept |
The architecture is the same, and a TCFD-aligned reporter will recognise the shape of an IFRS S2 disclosure at once.
What changed is status, precision and reach — the measurement basis is fixed on the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard.
The scope-by-scope mechanics are on Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions and UK SRS Scope 3 reporting.
Three systems
ISSB, GRI and ESRS: three audiences, three tests
A UK group that reports internationally can meet all three.
The useful question is which audience each serves and whether any mechanism lets one figure count twice.
| ISSB Standards | GRI Standards | ESRS | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Written for | Investors and lenders | Everyone affected by the organisation’s impacts | Both — impacts and financial effects |
| Materiality | Financial | Impact | Double |
| Legal force | None by itself; only where a jurisdiction requires it | Voluntary | Law for CSRD-scope undertakings; revised ESRS apply from financial years beginning 1 January 2027 |
| In the UK | UK SRS S1 and S2 — voluntary, comply or explain for listed companies from 2027 | Voluntary; no UK instrument requires it | Reaches UK groups only through CSRD scope |
| Figure-level link to the ISSB | — | GRI 102 / IFRS S2 greenhouse gas equivalence, from 1 January 2027 | Interoperability guidance of 2 May 2024 — “not a formal statement of equivalence” |
Of the three pairings, only ISSB–GRI has a mechanism that lets one figure satisfy two requirements, and it covers greenhouse gases alone.
The ISSB–ESRS relationship is closer on climate and weaker in law: the 2024 guidance describes aligned definitions and fences itself as educational material.
Both standards have since moved — the ISSB amended IFRS S2 in December 2025, and revised ESRS were published in September 2026 — so a group relying on the 2024 tables should re-check every paragraph reference.
The EU side is on the ESRS, the EU directive, CSRD against UK SRS and UK SRS vs ESRS; the map of all three is on global sustainability standards.
Which groups the EU regime reaches from FY2027 — undertakings exceeding both 1,000 employees and €450 million of net turnover — is on the CSRD scope test.
GRI and the ISSB
Interoperability: does it change a line you file?
“GRI and the ISSB are aligned” is repeated everywhere and rarely sourced.
What exists between them is a memorandum of understanding from 2022, a joint statement on interoperability from May 2024, a greenhouse-gas equivalence statement from June 2025 and a joint framing statement from May 2026.
One of the four changes what a preparer does: organisations reporting under both may use the IFRS S2 Scope 1, 2 and 3 figures to meet the corresponding GRI 102 requirements, if measured on the GHG Protocol and cross-referenced in the content index.
It does not bite until GRI 102 takes effect on 1 January 2027, or on early adoption.
No disclosure-level correspondence table between the two has been published by either owner, and the boards say they “make decisions separately”.
The test beside this text sorts the claims you are likely to be shown into strong, middle and weak forms; the GRI Standards are covered on ESG standards.
Does it change what you file?
The verdict names its strength, its status and its owner’s own limit.
Sources: GRI, GRI 102 and IFRS S2 equivalence statement (26 June 2025) §4; GRI and IFRS Foundation joint statement (26 May 2026); EFRAG and IFRS Foundation, Interoperability Guidance (2 May 2024); DBT consultation response (25 February 2026), Ch. 3; Companies Act 2006 s.414CB(6).
Nothing is stored or sent.
The climate standard
What IFRS S2 asks a company to produce
IFRS S2 is where the framework stops being architecture and starts being work.
Greenhouse gas emissions across all three scopes, measured on the GHG Protocol, with Scope 3 covering the categories the entity includes and financed emissions for financial institutions.
Climate resilience assessed through scenario analysis — the strategy tested against more than one plausible climate future, at a depth commensurate with the entity’s circumstances.
Read what each requirement involves
Named governance: which body oversees climate, how it judges its own competence, how information reaches it, and whether executive remuneration is linked to climate.
Current and anticipated financial effects on financial position, performance and cash flows, and industry-based metrics.
And, where the entity has a climate transition plan, information about it — which is where more preparers go wrong than anywhere else, because the standard does not require a plan to exist.
The UK position on plans is on climate transition plans.
IFRS S2 ¶14(a)(iv) reaches “any climate-related transition plan the entity has”.
The IFRS Foundation’s June 2025 guidance on transition-plan disclosures “does not add to or otherwise change the requirements in IFRS S2”, and the archived TPT material carries the Foundation’s accuracy disclaimer.
How the EU climate standard differs — scenario analysis only if used, no annual resilience analysis, both Scope 2 methods — is set out in ESRS E1.
What IFRS S2 asksExplore
What IFRS S2 asks
Financial effects
Current and anticipated effects, and industry-based metrics.
What IFRS S2 asks
Transition plan
Information about any plan the entity has; no duty to have one.
Connectivity
Reconciled with the accounts, not bolted on
A disclosure built on the ISSB framework is meant to reconcile with the financial statements: the same reporting entity, the same period, consistent judgements.
The assumptions in a climate disclosure should be recognisably those used in impairment testing, useful lives, provisions and going concern; where they differ, the difference should be explicable.
Read the UK statutory point
A disclosure describing a material transition risk to a product line, beside an impairment review that assumes the line runs indefinitely, is an inconsistency an auditor will find.
In the UK the point has a statutory edge: the government confirmed that UK SRS S2 is a national reporting framework for section 414CB(6) of the Companies Act 2006, so the climate disclosures need not be duplicated.
Placement inside the annual report is therefore a practical question; see UK SRS reporting, and on assurance of the result, sustainability assurance.
The emissions inventory underneath is covered on carbon accounting for UK SRS.
- 1
Same entity and period
The disclosure and the financial statements cover the same reporting entity and period.
- 2
Same assumptions
Impairment, useful lives, provisions and going concern.
- 3
Explained differences
Where assumptions differ, the difference is explicable.
Adoption
Who uses the ISSB framework, by the owner’s count
The IFRS Foundation publishes its own count, and it is the only count worth citing.
More than 45 jurisdictions are using the ISSB Standards, on the Trustees’ five-year plan of 18 August 2026 — a floor that has climbed through 36 in June 2025 and 39 in October 2025.
“Taking steps towards” is not “in effect”, and the second number is the one a reader wants: requirements had come into effect in 19 jurisdictions as at 24 February 2026.
Read every count, with its date
| Figure | As at | What it counts |
|---|---|---|
| 36 jurisdictions | 12 June 2025 | Taking steps; first profiles and snapshots |
| 39 | 31 October 2025 | Decided to use or taking steps |
| 19 | 24 February 2026 | Requirements already in effect |
| More than 45 | 18 August 2026 | Using ISSB Standards — a floor |
| 22 profiles, 14 snapshots | 10 September 2026 | The directory, re-counted |
The directory splits jurisdictions two ways: a profile is published once an approach is finalised; a snapshot previews proposals and may differ from the final requirements.
Adding the two into one “adopted” count is how an honest figure becomes an overstatement.
On coverage, the Foundation’s May 2024 prose gives nearly 55% of global GDP, more than 40% of global market capitalisation and more than half of global greenhouse gas emissions, restated in its 2024 progress report.
Market capitalisation lags GDP because of one absence, which the Foundation names: the United States has not adopted.
The owner’s countExplore
The owner’s count
Coverage
Nearly 55% of global GDP, May 2024; the United States has not adopted.
The divergence
Adopting the standard is not mandating it
Three facts travel under one sentence and stopped moving together in 2026: whether a jurisdiction adopted the standard, whether anyone must use it, and which regulator does the requiring.
Brazil diverged from itself inside a month: on 29 May 2026 its securities regulator removed the obligation on public companies and replaced it with a comply-or-explain notice duty from 1 January 2027.
A company that opts in must still apply the standards in full, so “Brazil abandoned ISSB reporting” is wrong too.
Read the jurisdictions one by one
South Korea moved the other way, lowering its threshold for 2028 reporting — a policy decision, not yet a statute.
In the United States the 2024 climate rules were proposed for rescission on 29 May 2026: proposed, not repealed, and with no ruling on the merits.
Canada’s regulators paused a mandatory rule on 23 April 2025 — a date several 2026 commentaries get wrong.
The United Kingdom was its own category until 30 September 2026: standards issued for voluntary use and no rule. It now has a rule, and it is comply or explain.
Filter by direction or status
Showing 5 of 5
| Jurisdiction | Date | What happened |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil (CVM) | 29 May 2026 | Obligation for public companies removed; comply-or-explain notice duty from 1 January 2027. An opt-in company applies the standards in full, with reasonable assurance. |
| South Korea (FSC) | 8 July 2026 | Threshold cut from ₩30 trillion to ₩10 trillion of consolidated assets for 2028 reporting, ₩5 trillion from 2029. A policy decision; the enabling amendment was not confirmed passed. |
| United States (SEC) | 29 May 2026 | Rescission of the 2024 climate rules proposed, not adopted. The rules remain stayed and never effective; no merits ruling. |
| Canada (CSA) | 23 April 2025 | Work on a mandatory climate rule paused — 2025, not 2026. The Canadian standards remain voluntary. |
| United Kingdom (FCA) | 30 September 2026 | Final rules: listed companies in UKLR 6, 14, 15, 16 and 22 report against UK SRS on comply or explain, periods from 1 January 2027. |
Sources: CVM, 29 May 2026; FSC, 8 July 2026; SEC, 91 FR 33296; CSA via the OSC, 23 April 2025; FCA PS26/19.
The UK
How the UK applies the framework: endorsed, then comply or explain
The UK endorsed the framework rather than adopting it wholesale.
UK SRS S1 and UK SRS S2 were published on 25 February 2026 as the UK versions of IFRS S1 and S2, with the differences recorded in Annex A of the government response, which carries no count.
Read the UK detail
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Who publishes the UK standards? | DBT, 25 February 2026 (the department is BIST from 20 July 2026) |
| Status for most entities | Voluntary |
| Listed companies | UKLR 6, 14, 15, 16, 22 — comply or explain, periods from 1 January 2027 |
| Reliefs | One year for Scope 3; two years for non-climate matters |
| How many companies | PS26/19 gives no count; CP26/5 estimated around 600 affected |
They were issued for voluntary use, and the government’s guidance still describes them that way for any entity not caught by a rule.
The FCA’s final rules, published on 30 September 2026, require companies listed in five UK Listing Rules categories to report against UK SRS on a comply-or-explain basis for accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2027, with first reports in 2028.
The instrument was made by the FCA Board on 24 September 2026 and comes into force on 1 January 2027; the consultation it finalises, CP26/5, had proposed a mandatory S2, which did not survive.
The Foundation’s UK snapshot, dated 18 June 2026, still records the regulatory stage as “In progress”.
The listing-rule mechanics are on UK SRS and the FCA, and who is caught on UK SRS thresholds.
Assurance is not required by those rules: a listed company states whether it obtained assurance, and the EU’s required limited opinion is the contrast set out on assurance under the CSRD.
The UK positionExplore
The UK position
Listed companies
UKLR 6, 14, 15, 16, 22 — comply or explain, periods from 1 January 2027.
Endorsement
New ISSB standards do not apply in the UK automatically
The FRC states it plainly: any new or amended ISSB standard — on nature, on human capital — would first need to go through the UK’s formal endorsement process before being incorporated into UK SRS.
So the UK version can lag the global one, deliberately and by design.
The machinery is the two-committee process in DBT’s Framework and Terms of Reference: a Technical Advisory Committee for the technical assessment and a Policy and Implementation Committee for the policy one.
The split explains why some UK changes are technical and others are policy choices.
It also means a paragraph number cited without its standard is ambiguous: UK SRS S1 ¶55(a) does not say what IFRS S1 ¶55(a) says, and the transition appendices were renumbered.
Each UK change is annotated on UK SRS amendments; the endorsed pair is on UK SRS S1 and S2, with UK SRS S1 and UK SRS S2 paragraph by paragraph.
The UK route
From ISSB standard to UK rule, in eight steps
The UK splits one decision into three: the government endorses the standard; the FCA decides whether listed companies must use it; and the government decides, separately, whether the Companies Act should require it of anyone else.
Steps one to seven are done.
- 16 May 202401
1 · The endorsement framework
DBT publishes the Framework and Terms of Reference: TAC for technical assessment, PIC for policy. - 5 and 18 December 202402
2 · The TAC recommends endorsement
Agreed at a public meeting on 5 December; published by the FRC as secretariat on 18 December. - 25 June – 17 September 202503
- 5 January 202604
4 · The reliefs lose their time limits
DBT writes to the FCA that it will remove specific time references from the standards. - 30 January – 20 March 202605
- 25 February 202606
- 30 September 202607
7 · The FCA’s final rules: PS26/19
Comply or explain across UK SRS for five listing categories, periods from 1 January 2027. - Open to 30 November 202608
8 · The Companies Act question
The government “will consider” how UK SRS should be reflected in the Companies Act 2006 — no mechanism, no date.
Step four is the one most often missed: DBT’s letter to the FCA of 5 January 2026 explained why the standards would carry no relief periods, leaving them to whoever makes the rule.
That is why UK SRS S1 ¶E5 and UK SRS S2 ¶C6 subject the reliefs to the Companies Act, the FCA or another UK regulator.
Step seven used that power: PS26/19 sets one year for Scope 3 and two years for non-climate matters, and the FCA wrote CP26/5 against the exposure drafts, so its earlier description of relief lengths was the drafts’.
PS26/19 gives no total company count; CP26/5 Annex 2 ¶43 had estimated around 600 listed companies affected, and that remains the consultation’s estimate.
Step eight is open: the government’s Modernising corporate reporting consultation says it “will consider how UK SRS should be reflected in the Companies Act 2006”, and proposes no mechanism or date — see UK SRS and MCR.
In flight
Published, in force, applicable here: three different states
| Project | State on 1 October 2026 | Applies in the UK? |
|---|---|---|
| IFRS S2 greenhouse gas amendments (December 2025) | Published; effective for periods beginning on or after 1 January 2027, earlier application permitted | Already inside UK SRS S2 as issued |
| ISSB Taxonomy — Proposed Update 1 (29 July 2026) | Comment period closed 28 September 2026; tagging vocabulary only, “neither introduces new requirements nor affects a company’s compliance” | Not a requirement |
| SASB enhancement exposure drafts | Latest closed 24 July 2026; effective 12–18 months after issuance if finalised | Only through the softened UK SRS references |
| Nature-related Disclosures | Exposure draft of a proposed Practice Statement cleared for ballot 21 July 2026; targeted for October 2026; 120-day comment period | Not without UK endorsement |
| Human Capital | Research; next milestone “decide project direction” | Not without UK endorsement |
Writing about the ISSB framework as a settled 2023 artefact is the most reliable way to be out of date.
Nature is in standard-setting, and the output will be a non-mandatory IFRS Practice Statement — “not a Standard”, though “a jurisdiction can choose to mandate it”.
A 120-day comment period means nothing final can follow for at least four months after the exposure draft appears, and in the UK nothing applies until it is endorsed; the TNFD side is on TNFD.
Human capital is still research; the FRC’s expectation of a decision in March 2026 has passed without one, so cite the FRC for the endorsement rule, not for ISSB timing.
The first years
Transition reliefs under three texts
| Relief | IFRS S1 / S2 | UK SRS used voluntarily | FCA final rules (listed companies) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Climate first — report only climate-related risks and opportunities | First annual reporting period only (IFRS S1 ¶E5) | No time limit in the Standard (UK SRS S1 ¶E3); a user may not assert compliance with UK SRS S1 (¶73A) | Two years from initial application (PS26/19 ¶3.14) |
| No Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions | First annual reporting period only (IFRS S2 ¶C4(b)) | No time limit (UK SRS S2 ¶C4) | One year from initial application (¶3.14) |
| Keep a non-GHG Protocol measurement method | First annual reporting period, if used immediately before (IFRS S2 ¶C4(a)) | First period only (UK SRS S2 ¶C3) | One year, if used immediately before (¶3.16) |
| No comparatives | First annual reporting period (IFRS S1 ¶E3; IFRS S2 ¶C3) | First period (UK SRS S1 ¶E1; UK SRS S2 ¶C1) | — |
| Saying you used a relief | Disclose the fact | Disclose alongside the statement of compliance (UK SRS S2 ¶C5, S1 ¶73A) | State it; no further explanation needed during the relief (¶3.20) |
The reliefs are where the three texts part most visibly, and where a first report is most likely to cite the wrong one.
IFRS limits every relief to the first annual reporting period: a company applying IFRS S1 and S2 reports on all its sustainability-related risks and opportunities, including Scope 3, from year two.
The UK standards, used voluntarily, removed the time limit from the climate-first and Scope 3 reliefs — a change recorded in Annex A — but kept the one-year limit on the measurement-method relief.
The FCA’s final rules then set their own clock for listed companies: one year for Scope 3, two years for non-climate matters, both from the first period beginning on or after 1 January 2027.
After a relief ends, the disclosure moves onto the same comply-or-explain basis as everything else in UK SRS under the rules; nothing becomes mandatory when it ends.
The year-by-year version is computed on IFRS S1 (climate first) and IFRS S2 (Scope 3 and measurement method).
Following the Board
Where the ISSB’s work is published, and how to read it
The ISSB publishes in layers, and reading the wrong layer is how a staff recommendation ends up quoted as a decision.
Agenda papers are written by the staff for a meeting; the Board may accept, change or reject what they recommend.
The ISSB Update issued after each meeting records what the Board actually decided, and is the first place to check a reported change.
The nature project is a worked example: in April 2026 the staff paper analysed the form the output should take, and in July 2026 the Board cleared an exposure draft of a Practice Statement for ballot (ISSB Update, July 2026).
Exposure drafts carry a comment period — 120 days for the nature draft — and nothing in one applies, even to an entity applying IFRS S1 and S2 in full.
The Sustainability Standards Advisory Forum, the ISSB’s forum of jurisdictional representatives, publishes its own papers; its October 2026 paper on nature is the latest public statement of the timetable.
For a UK reader, one more layer sits on top: nothing the ISSB issues reaches UK SRS until it has been through the UK endorsement process.
| Document | What it is | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| ISSB Update | Summary of each Board meeting’s decisions | Record of decisions; not a standard |
| Agenda papers | Staff analysis put to the Board | Staff views; not Board decisions |
| Project pages | Stage and next milestone for each project | Status only |
| Exposure drafts | Proposals out for public comment | Proposals; nothing applies |
| Issued standards | The text, in the Navigator | Requirements, once adopted |
In practice
The order of work is not the order of the standard
Reporters who start at governance and write down the page tend to discover, late, that the data will not support what they have said.
Start with the two things that take longest: the greenhouse gas inventory, and the judgement of which risks and opportunities could reasonably be expected to affect prospects.
The inventory is a measurement exercise with an audit trail: Scope 1 and 2 are usually tractable, Scope 3 is a value-chain mapping problem, and the fifteen categories are not equally relevant to any business.
The materiality judgement should be documented, not asserted — and the SASB topics exist so it does not start from a blank page; the financial test it applies is set out in each framework’s words.
Governance is worth writing once you know what the body is being asked to oversee.
Scenario analysis, financial effects and the transition-plan disclosure come last, because each depends on the first two being real.
For help following that order of work, the guide to what a sustainability reporting consultant does sets out when one is worth bringing in.
Corrections
Seven claims about the ISSB, true or false
Each of these circulates widely, and each is settled by an owner’s document.
The sixth became false on 30 September 2026, and much material written before that date still says it.
The seventh is the subtle one: a Practice Statement is optional, but IFRS S1 already requires material nature-related information.
Interoperability claims are the subject of the test in the section above; where interoperability stops is that one question — does it change a line you file?
The ISSB framework: true or false?
The ISSB absorbed the TCFD.
The ISSB framework uses double materiality.
GRI and the ISSB are fully interoperable.
More than 45 jurisdictions require ISSB reporting.
The SEC has repealed its climate disclosure rules.
Under the FCA’s final rules, listed companies must apply UK SRS S2 in full from 2027.
A future ISSB nature Practice Statement would be optional for a company even under IFRS S1.
0 of 7 answered.
Nothing you choose is stored or sent.
The record
The ISSB framework, key facts with their dates
| Fact | |
|---|---|
| What it is | IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 — the global baseline for sustainability disclosure to investors |
| Who issues it | The ISSB, part of the IFRS Foundation, alongside but independently from the IASB |
| Oversight | Trustees appoint the Board; the Monitoring Board (January 2009) approves the Trustees |
| Formed | 3 November 2021, COP26, Glasgow |
| First standards | June 2023; IFRS S2 effective 1 January 2024 — IFRS’s date, not the UK’s |
| Pillars | Four, from the TCFD, with eleven recommended disclosures beneath them |
| Materiality | Financial; not double materiality |
| Industry layer | SASB Standards — 77 industries, 11 sectors, owned by the ISSB since August 2022 |
| Adoption | More than 45 jurisdictions using (18 August 2026); in effect in 19 (24 February 2026) |
| UK | UK SRS S1 and S2, 25 February 2026, voluntary; FCA final rules 30 September 2026 — comply or explain for five listing categories from periods beginning 1 January 2027 |
| In flight | IFRS S2 amendments effective 1 January 2027; nature exposure draft targeted October 2026; human capital in research |
| What it is not | A double-materiality standard, a law in its own right, or a body that absorbed the TCFD |
Start with the standards before comparing software claims. See ISSB framework.
Frequently asked
The ISSB framework, answered
What is the ISSB framework?
The global baseline for sustainability reporting to investors: IFRS S1, the general requirements standard, and IFRS S2, the climate standard, issued by the International Sustainability Standards Board in June 2023, together with the four pillars they are organised around and the SASB industry material they point to.
The ISSB publishes standards, not a document called “the ISSB Framework”.
What is the ISSB?
The International Sustainability Standards Board, a standard-setting board of the IFRS Foundation announced on 3 November 2021 at COP26 in Glasgow.
It operates alongside but independently from the IASB, which sets accounting standards. It had 12 members at its July 2026 meeting.
What are the four pillars of the ISSB framework?
Governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets.
They are the TCFD’s four recommendations, carried into IFRS S2.
Beneath them sit eleven recommended disclosures — two under governance and three under each of the others — which the TCFD’s October 2021 update left unchanged.
Is the ISSB framework mandatory?
Not by itself.
The ISSB is a standard-setter, not a regulator; its standards create a duty only where a jurisdiction adopts and requires them.
Requirements had come into effect in 19 jurisdictions as at 24 February 2026.
In the UK, listed companies in UKLR 6, 14, 15, 16 and 22 report against UK SRS — the UK versions — on a comply-or-explain basis for periods beginning on or after 1 January 2027.
Does the ISSB framework use double materiality?
No. It applies financial materiality: information is in scope where it could reasonably be expected to affect the entity’s prospects.
The ISSB and GRI have said jointly that ISSB Standards require information about impacts only in so far as it is material for investors with respect to the entity’s sustainability-related risks and opportunities.
Double materiality is the EU’s formulation.
Who governs the ISSB?
The IFRS Foundation Trustees appoint the Board’s members, maintain the Constitution and Due Process Handbook and oversee its work.
The Trustees are overseen by the Monitoring Board, a group of capital-market authorities created in January 2009, which approves Trustee appointments.
Neither writes standards; the ISSB does, through due process.
What is the difference between the ISSB framework and TCFD?
The architecture is the same and the status is not.
The TCFD was a task force issuing recommendations; the ISSB issues standards a jurisdiction can write into law.
IFRS S2 also requires Scope 3 emissions (the TCFD said “if appropriate”), fixes the GHG Protocol as the measurement basis and brings SASB-derived industry metrics inside the standard.
The TCFD disbanded on 12 October 2023.
How do the SASB Standards fit into the ISSB framework?
The ISSB has been responsible for the SASB Standards since August 2022.
They cover 77 industries across 11 sectors under the SICS classification.
IFRS S1 says an entity shall refer to and consider the SASB disclosure topics; UK SRS S1 says may.
Most standards carry version 2023-12; three financial-sector standards carry 2025-12, effective 1 January 2027.
How many countries have adopted the ISSB framework?
Two numbers, answering different questions.
More than 45 jurisdictions are using or taking steps towards the ISSB Standards, on the IFRS Foundation Trustees’ five-year plan of 18 August 2026.
Requirements had come into effect in 19 jurisdictions as at 24 February 2026.
The directory separately carried 22 profiles and 14 snapshots on 10 September 2026.
How does the UK apply the ISSB framework?
It endorsed IFRS S1 and S2 as UK SRS S1 and S2, published by the Department for Business and Trade on 25 February 2026 for voluntary use, with the differences listed in Annex A of the government response.
The FCA’s final rules (PS26/19, 30 September 2026) require listed companies in five categories to report against them or explain, for periods beginning on or after 1 January 2027.
Do new ISSB standards apply in the UK automatically?
No. The FRC says any new or amended ISSB standard — on nature or human capital, for example — would first need to go through the UK’s formal endorsement process before being incorporated into UK SRS.
What is the ISSB working on in 2026?
Nature and human capital, at different stages.
The nature project is in standard-setting: in July 2026 the Board cleared an exposure draft of a proposed IFRS Practice Statement for ballot, with a 120-day comment period, targeted for October 2026.
Human capital is a research project whose next step is to decide the project’s direction.
What is changing in IFRS S2?
The December 2025 Amendments to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures apply from periods beginning on or after 1 January 2027, with earlier application permitted.
The ISSB’s taxonomy update tracking them closed for comment on 28 September 2026 and introduces no new requirement.
The SASB Standards are being enhanced through exposure drafts.
Is the ISSB framework the same as IFRS S1 and IFRS S2?
Largely.
IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 are the standards the ISSB has issued, and they are what people mean by “the ISSB framework”.
The phrase usually reaches a little wider — to the four pillars and the SASB industry material.
What transition reliefs does the ISSB framework give?
Under IFRS S1 and S2, all of them last for the first annual reporting period only: reporting on climate alone (IFRS S1 ¶E5), omitting Scope 3 emissions and keeping an existing measurement method (IFRS S2 ¶C4), no comparatives, and reporting after the financial statements.
The UK standards removed the time limit from the climate-first and Scope 3 reliefs; the FCA’s final rules give listed companies one year for Scope 3 and two for non-climate matters.
Where can I read the ISSB standards?
The issued standards are published by the IFRS Foundation in the IFRS Sustainability Standards Navigator, with the full text of IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 available to read.
The UK versions, UK SRS S1 and S2, are published on GOV.UK by the Department for Business and Trade.
What is the ISSB Update?
The summary the ISSB publishes after each Board meeting, recording the decisions taken.
It is the record to check before repeating a reported change: agenda papers are staff analysis put to the Board, not decisions, and an exposure draft is a proposal on which nothing applies.
How does the ISSB framework compare with the CSRD?
The CSRD is EU law requiring in-scope undertakings to report under the ESRS on a double materiality basis, with limited assurance.
The ISSB framework is a baseline that binds only where a jurisdiction adopts it, and it applies financial materiality.
The joint ESRS–ISSB guidance of 2 May 2024 says the financial-materiality definitions are aligned and almost all ISSB climate disclosures are included in the ESRS, but it is educational material, not a statement of equivalence.
How does IFRS S1 relate to IFRS S2?
IFRS S1 sets the general requirements for every sustainability-related disclosure: the materiality test, the four-pillar structure, connected information, the sources of guidance, and judgements and errors.
IFRS S2 applies that structure to one topic, climate, with specific requirements such as greenhouse gas emissions and climate resilience.
An entity applying IFRS S2 applies IFRS S1 with it.
Sources
Primary sources
Every figure, date and status on this page traces to the instrument’s owner.
Secondary commentary is never the source for a number.
Checked against 23 sources fromIFRS FoundationTCFDFinancial Stability BoardGRI and the IFRS FoundationGRIFinancial Conduct Authority
- IFRS FoundationInternational Sustainability Standards Board
Formation at COP26 on 3 November 2021; the lineage; the four objectives.
- IFRS FoundationWho we are
The ISSB “operates alongside—but independently from—the IASB”.
- IFRS FoundationOur structure
Two boards, the Trustees, and the Monitoring Board.
- IFRS FoundationMonitoring Board
Created in January 2009; memorandum updated in May 2023 for the ISSB.
- IFRS FoundationIFRS S1 — full text
Paragraphs 1–86 and Appendices A–E; approved by all 14 Board members in June 2023.
- IFRS FoundationIFRS S2 — full text, December 2025 version
The climate standard; ¶29(a) and the industry-based metrics.
- IFRS FoundationAmendments to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures (PDF)
Approved by 11 of the 12 members; effective 1 January 2027.
- IFRS FoundationSASB Standards
Ownership by the ISSB, 77 industries and the version stamps.
- TCFDFinal Report, June 2017
Figure 4, p. 14: the four recommendations and eleven recommended disclosures.
- TCFDImplementing the Recommendations — October 2021 Annex (PDF)
The four and the eleven expressly unmodified; GHG emissions independent of materiality.
- Financial Stability BoardFSB annual progress report on climate-related disclosures, 12 October 2023
The TCFD’s final task; the Task Force disbanded.
- IFRS FoundationConsolidated organisations
The CDSB and the Value Reporting Foundation.
- IFRS FoundationIRCC legacy — Advisory Council paper AC8 (PDF)
Mandate transferred to the IFRS Advisory Council, 31 July 2026.
- GRI and the IFRS FoundationFacilitating efficient reporting when using the GRI and ISSB Standards, 26 May 2026
Impacts only so far as material to investors; decisions made separately.
- GRIGRI 102 and IFRS S2 — statement on equivalence, 26 June 2025
The one figure-level mechanism, for greenhouse gases.
- IFRS FoundationUse of IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards by jurisdiction
Profiles and snapshots.
- IFRS FoundationJurisdictional readiness guide and tool, 24 February 2026
Requirements in effect in 19 jurisdictions.
- IFRS FoundationJurisdictions representing over half the global economy by GDP — 28 May 2024
The GDP, market-capitalisation and emissions shares, in prose.
- Financial Conduct AuthorityPS26/19 — Aligning listed issuers’ sustainability disclosures with international standards
The final rules, 30 September 2026: UK SRS on comply or explain.
- Department for Business and TradeUK SRS S1 and UK SRS S2
Published 25 February 2026 for voluntary use.
- Department for Business and TradeFramework and Terms of Reference for UK SRS
The endorsement process and the TAC/PIC split.
- Financial Reporting CouncilSustainability Reporting Developments — FAQs
New ISSB standards “would not automatically apply in the UK”.
- Securities and Exchange CommissionRescission of Climate-Related Disclosure Rules — 91 FR 33296
Proposed withdrawal, 29 May 2026; not final.
Continue reading
Read next
The hub
IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards
The ISSB family in one place: S1, S2, the guidance around them, adoption and the UK route.
The general standard
IFRS S1
The general standard, paragraph by paragraph, and its climate-first relief under three texts.
The climate standard
IFRS S2
The climate standard as a lookup, the December 2025 amendments and the UK differences.
The map
Global sustainability standards
The ISSB, the EU regime and GRI — and where alignment stops.
Industry standards
SASB Standards
The industry layer, who owns it, and where UK SRS says “may”.
The UK standards
UK SRS S1 and S2
The UK’s endorsed versions of the two ISSB standards.
Nature
TNFD
Nature reporting, and the ISSB’s proposed Practice Statement.
EU comparison
The EU law against the ISSB baseline
Scope, materiality, climate content and assurance compared.
More on the ISSB standards: ISSB standards · ISSB reporting requirements · IFRS S1 and S2 · CSRD and ISSB · ISSB reporting software · ISSB nature-related disclosures