Skip to content
GT
πŸ“‹ Sustainability / ESG Reporting in Practice
The Standards LandscapeLesson 2 of 38 min read

Other Frameworks at a Glance: SASB, TCFD, IFRS, CDP, BRSR

Other Frameworks at a Glance: SASB, TCFD, IFRS, CDP, BRSR

GRI is the backbone, but it is far from the only standard your clients will mention. Walk into any ESG reporting engagement and you will hear a string of acronyms: SASB, TCFD, IFRS, CDP, BRSR, UNPRI. Some clients will reference all of them in the same sentence without fully understanding what each one does.

Your job is to know what each framework covers, who it serves, and, critically, how it relates to everything else. This lesson gives you that map. We are not doing a deep dive into any single standard (those deserve their own courses), but you need enough fluency to guide clients through the landscape without getting lost yourself.

SASB: Industry-Specific Materiality

The Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) takes a fundamentally different approach from GRI. Where GRI asks "what are your impacts on the world?", SASB asks "what sustainability issues could affect your financial performance?"

This is the concept of financial materiality, and it is why investors tend to gravitate toward SASB. The framework provides industry-specific standards for 77 industries, each with a curated set of disclosure topics and metrics that are most likely to be financially material for companies in that sector.

In practice, SASB shows up in two ways:

  1. The SASB Materiality Map. Clients (or their investors) will reference this map to identify which sustainability topics matter most for their industry. It is a useful starting point for scoping a report.
  2. As an index alongside GRI. Many reports include a SASB index in addition to the GRI Content Index, essentially cross-referencing where each SASB metric is addressed in the report.

SASB does not replace GRI: it complements it. GRI gives you the broadest set of disclosures. SASB helps you prioritize which of those disclosures matter most to investors in a specific industry. Many reports reference both.

TCFD: Climate Risk Disclosure

The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) was created by the Financial Stability Board in 2015 with a specific mandate: help companies disclose how climate change affects their business, and how their business affects the climate.

TCFD is structured around four pillars: Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, and Metrics & Targets. It pushed companies to think about climate in terms of physical risks (floods, droughts, extreme weather) and transition risks (policy changes, technology shifts, market preferences).

Here is the important update: TCFD has been effectively absorbed into IFRS. In 2023, the ISSB (International Sustainability Standards Board) released IFRS S2, which incorporates and builds on TCFD's recommendations. The TCFD itself was disbanded in late 2023, with monitoring responsibilities transferred to the IFRS Foundation.

So why do you still need to know about TCFD? Because:

  • Many existing reports still reference TCFD explicitly
  • Clients with past reports will have TCFD mappings they want to maintain
  • The four-pillar structure (Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, Metrics & Targets) lives on in IFRS S2
  • Some jurisdictions still reference TCFD in their regulations

Think of TCFD as a company that got acquired. The brand name is fading, but the product (the four-pillar approach to climate disclosure) was so good that the acquiring company (IFRS) kept it and built on top of it. If a client mentions TCFD today, they are really talking about the approach that now lives inside IFRS S2.

IFRS S1 & S2: The New Global Baseline

The IFRS Foundation (the same organization behind the accounting standards used in 140+ countries) entered the sustainability space in 2021 by creating the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). In June 2023, the ISSB published two standards:

  • IFRS S1 (General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information): the overarching framework for sustainability disclosure
  • IFRS S2 (Climate-related Disclosures): the specific standard for climate, building on TCFD

These standards are designed to be the global baseline for sustainability disclosure aimed at investors and capital markets. The key word is "baseline": jurisdictions can adopt IFRS S1/S2 as-is or build additional requirements on top.

What makes IFRS different from GRI in practice:

  • Audience: IFRS is designed for investors and capital markets. GRI is designed for all stakeholders.
  • Materiality lens: IFRS uses financial materiality (what affects enterprise value). GRI uses impact materiality (what affects the world). The European CSRD combines both into "double materiality."
  • Scope: IFRS S2 is currently focused on climate. GRI covers the full spectrum of sustainability topics.

For practitioners, IFRS S1/S2 is increasingly showing up in client conversations, especially for companies with international investors, dual listings, or operations in jurisdictions that are adopting the ISSB standards.

CDP: Questionnaire-Based Disclosure

CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project) operates differently from the other frameworks. Instead of providing a reporting standard, CDP sends annual questionnaires to companies on behalf of investors and purchasing organizations. The three main questionnaires cover Climate Change, Water Security, and Forests.

Companies respond to CDP questionnaires, and CDP scores them from A (leadership) to D- (disclosure) based on the quality and completeness of their responses.

In practice, CDP matters because:

  • Investor pressure. CDP represents over 740 institutional investors with $136 trillion in assets. When CDP sends a questionnaire, companies pay attention.
  • Ratings input. CDP scores feed into ESG ratings and indices. A poor CDP score can hurt a company's ESG standing.
  • Data overlap. Much of the data needed for CDP responses overlaps with what goes into the sustainability report. Smart practitioners collect data once and use it for both.

CDP has aligned its questionnaires with TCFD (now IFRS S2), so there is significant overlap. If a company has already prepared IFRS S2-aligned disclosures, responding to CDP becomes much easier.

BRSR: India's Mandatory Framework

The Business Responsibility & Sustainability Report (BRSR) is mandated by SEBI (Securities and Exchange Board of India) for the top 1,000 listed companies in India by market capitalization.

BRSR is structured around nine principles from India's National Guidelines on Responsible Business Conduct (NGRBC). It requires both qualitative and quantitative disclosures across environmental, social, and governance topics.

The critical thing practitioners need to know about BRSR:

BRSR is typically prepared alongside the annual report, not the sustainability report. But if the reporting boundary is the same in both documents, the data MUST match. Data inconsistency between the BRSR and the sustainability report is one of the most common, and most serious, errors companies make.

BRSR also introduced a "BRSR Core" framework for assurance-ready disclosures, and there is an evolving BRSR Lite for smaller companies. The framework continues to evolve, with increasing emphasis on value chain disclosures.

UNPRI: The Investor Side

The United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI, or just PRI) is not a reporting standard for companies: it is a framework for investors. Signatories commit to incorporating ESG factors into their investment decisions and ownership practices.

Why does this matter for ESG report writers? Because UNPRI signatories are often the audience reading your report. When a client says "our investors are asking for ESG disclosure," those investors are frequently UNPRI signatories following the PRI framework. Understanding what UNPRI signatories look for helps you write a report that actually serves its intended audience.

CSRD & ESRS: The European Regulatory Push

While not on every company's radar, the EU's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and its associated European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) deserve a mention. CSRD makes detailed sustainability reporting legally mandatory for a large number of companies operating in or connected to the EU. It introduced the concept of double materiality into regulation, requiring companies to report on both their impact on the world and the world's impact on them.

Even for companies outside the EU, CSRD is relevant because:

  • Global supply chains mean EU regulations can reach non-EU companies
  • The double materiality concept is influencing standard-setters worldwide
  • Clients are increasingly asking about it proactively

How these show up in a real engagement: A mid-size Indian manufacturing company listed on the NSE wants to publish a sustainability report. In practice, they will structure the report around GRI (the backbone), ensure BRSR data is consistent with the report, include a SASB index for their international investors, respond to the CDP Climate questionnaire using the same data, and reference IFRS S2 for climate-related disclosures. That is five frameworks touched in a single engagement, but the underlying data is largely the same. The work is in mapping, not in collecting entirely different datasets for each.

The Relationships Between Standards

Here is the mental model that will save you confusion:

GRI sits at the base. It is the broadest, most comprehensive set of disclosures. Almost every other standard can be mapped to GRI indicators.

SASB is a filter. It helps you prioritize which topics are financially material for a specific industry. Use it alongside GRI, not instead of it.

IFRS S1/S2 is the emerging global baseline for capital markets. It absorbed TCFD and will increasingly become mandatory in various jurisdictions.

CDP is a disclosure mechanism. It uses questionnaires aligned with IFRS S2 and scores companies on their responses.

BRSR is a regulatory requirement for Indian listed companies. It overlaps significantly with GRI but has its own structure and must be kept consistent.

CSRD/ESRS is the European regulatory framework. It mandates double materiality and is the most prescriptive of the lot.

The sustainability reporting landscape has been consolidating rapidly. The IFRS Foundation absorbed the Value Reporting Foundation (which housed SASB) in 2022. TCFD was disbanded in 2023 with its work folded into IFRS S2. GRI and ISSB signed a cooperation agreement to ensure their standards work together. The direction is clear: fewer, more interoperable standards over time. But for practitioners today, you still need to navigate all of them because clients have existing reports, ongoing commitments, and regulatory obligations tied to specific frameworks.

The next lesson will show you how these standards actually work together in practice, and how to choose which ones to use for a given engagement.

Key Takeaways

  • 1GRI is the base layer; SASB, IFRS S1/S2, and CSRD are lenses that shape emphasis; CDP and BRSR are delivery mechanisms - they stack, not compete
  • 2TCFD has been absorbed into IFRS S2, but its four-pillar structure (Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, Metrics & Targets) lives on and still appears in legacy reports
  • 3SASB complements GRI by filtering for financially material topics within 77 industry-specific standards - use it alongside GRI, not instead of it
  • 4CDP scores companies on climate, water, and forests questionnaires - the data overlaps heavily with your sustainability report, so collect once and use for both
  • 5BRSR is mandatory for top-1000 Indian listed companies and must be kept data-consistent with the sustainability report if both share the same boundary
  • 6The standards landscape is consolidating (IFRS absorbed SASB and TCFD, GRI-ISSB cooperation agreement), but practitioners must still navigate multiple frameworks for years to come

Knowledge Check

1.What happened to the TCFD framework, and why do practitioners still need to know about it?

2.What is the fundamental difference between the materiality lens used by GRI versus the one used by IFRS/SASB?

3.A company already prepares IFRS S2-aligned climate disclosures for their sustainability report. How does this affect their CDP questionnaire response?