Getting More Value Out of

Sustainability Reporting
Connecting IFC’s Sustainability Performance
Standards and the GRI Reporting Framework

A Good Practice Note by IFC and GRI In partnership with

Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Norway.
We have found that more effective dialogue about
sustainability with our clients enables us to offer
better assistance to strengthen their businesses.
CONTENTS
Foreword - Building stronger business relationships ...........................................iii
How to use this Good Practice Note ...................................................................v

IFC’s Performance Standards and the Global Reporting Initiative ....................... 1

Sustainability Reporting as a business process ................................................... 5
Engaging with IFC as one of the stakeholders for your report .......................... 10
Practical Alignment of IFC and GRI reporting requirements.............................. 13
FOREWORD
Building stronger business relationships

The last decade has seen a steady rise in public demand for businesses to be transparent about their
environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance, including their contributions to local economies.
Companies worldwide have met this trend with increasing uptake of what is now commonly called
“sustainability reporting”.

As a member of the global investment community and a leader in sustainability standards in emerging markets,
IFC sees sustainability reporting as an opportunity for a more dynamic engagement between investors and
businesses. There is a clear link between good ESG performance and the ability of enterprises to be profitable
and survive turbulent times. We have integrated sustainability in our own approach to investments in emerging
markets and we have seen the value and the importance of adequate disclosure.

However, there is still a big gap, especially in emerging markets, when it comes to material ESG information
about company performance. Many investors, including institutional investors, need this information to make
informed investment decisions. The lack of sustainability reports is a significant constraint on their ability to
analyze and channel capital to sustainable emerging market companies.

IFC has been working for several years now to address the information gap, and our partnership with the
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is part of that on-going effort. Over the last decade, GRI has established the
international standard for sustainability reporting by organizations worldwide. IFC has therefore partnered
with GRI to offer this Good Practice Note for interested companies on how to improve their sustainability
reporting using the GRI Guidelines in conjunction with IFC’s Sustainability Framework.

IFC sees sustainability reporting as a timely next step to improve transparency and strengthen trust in the private
sector. It is also a management tool that can help companies to identify operational efficiency improvements,
innovate in their products and services, build stronger relationships with stakeholders, enhance reputational
value and, increasingly, attract investors.

We would like to see many more of our clients undertaking GRI-based reporting alongside and as part of
their traditional annual reporting. Companies achieving excellence across all aspects of management are
companies most likely to grow and succeed over the long term.

We hope you will find this document useful and we welcome your feedback.

RACHEL KYTE
Vice President, Business Advisory Services, IFC

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING iii

IFC’s Sustainability Framework – Review and Update Process 2009-2011
In September 2009, IFC began a review and update of its Sustainability Framework, which includes
Performance Standards on Social and Environmental Sustainability (IFC’s “Performance Standards”) and
Policy on Disclosure of Information (IFC’s “Disclosure Policy”). The update, which will run until January 2011,
intends to ensure that the Standards, which came into effect in April 2006, reflect lessons learned from the
last three years of implementation and evolutions in the global environment. It will also give stakeholders the
opportunity to provide input through a public consultation process.

This guide is designed to help companies develop systems that respond to the Performance Standards
requirements around reporting. Consequently, the current version is being released as a “Road Test” draft to
solicit feedback on its usefulness. A final version will be published in 2011, following the completion of the
standards review and update.

For more information or to participate in the Performance Standards review process,

visit www.ifc.org/policyreview
HOW TO USE THIS GOOD PRACTICE NOTE

This Note is intended as a guide for companies on how to include information and indicators in their
sustainability reports that are likely to be material to IFC and to other organizations that may use IFC’s
Sustainability Framework as a benchmark. In addition to this note, there are several other GRI resources that
provide further information and can be found through the GRI website.

It also aims to show the links between the specific information needs of these institutions and the opportunities
for companies to align their strategy and management systems with broad stakeholder expectations, as
reflected by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Sustainability Reporting Framework

This guide therefore works at two levels:

UÊ To support senior executives and managers in establishing an effective internal system for
the sustainability reporting process as well as promoting an innovative and strategic approach to
sustainability at the corporate level.
UÊ To assist corporate reporting teams in the comparison of indicators between the IFC and GRI
frameworks, thereby structuring information more efficiently. In some cases there is clear alignment
and strong overlap. In other cases, one framework will richly complement the other and offer
greater guidance on how to cover a particular aspect of business performance.

The recommendations in this publication are part of IFC’s efforts to show how the Performance Standards
align with leading standards in the market place. They do not guarantee that a company will meet the
disclosure requirements in IFC’s Performance Standards and Disclosure Policy.

However, companies with sustainability reports that follow the GRI principles will have a greater
likelihood of addressing IFC information needs. Similarly, IFCs performance requirements and disclosure
requests may set a company on its way to having the components of a comprehensive sustainability report.

The guiding theme is that, when done well, sustainability reporting is a business process that can create
internal management benefits as well as enhance reputational value.

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING v

 
SECTION IFC’S PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND
THE GLOBAL REPORTING INITIATIVE

For almost two decades, IFC has been applying environmental and social standards to all the projects it
finances, in order to mitigate negative impacts on the environment and on affected communities and enhance
the positive development impacts. This reflects IFC’s belief that environmentally and socially sustainable
companies are well-run companies with reduced risk and greater opportunities to succeed.

IFC’s Performance Standards were produced through a rigorous process, including a wide stakeholder
consultation, and have become a leading benchmark for international finance institutions working with the
private sector. In 2006, the newly released Performance Standards were adopted as a basis for the Equator
Principles, a benchmark for sustainable finance in emerging markets (www.equator-principles.com).

To date, over 70 banks and financial institutions from developed and emerging markets have adopted the
Equator Principles. In addition, 32 export credit agencies of the OECD countries and 16 European development
finance institutions now benchmark private sector projects against the Performance Standards. At the same
time, while not adopting the Standards in their entirety, some multilateral institutions are looking to achieve
“Standards equivalence” in their latest policy updates.

There are currently 8 Performance Standards (PSs), which outline the responsibilities of companies receiving
or applying for IFC investment. They cover:
UÊ PS1: Social and Environmental Assessment and Management Systems
UÊ PS2: Labor and Working Conditions
UÊ PS3: Pollution Prevention and Abatement
UÊ PS4: Community Health, Safety, and Security
UÊ PS5: Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement
UÊ PS6: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Natural Resource Management
UÊ PS7: Indigenous Peoples
UÊ PS8: Cultural Heritage
Throughout, the standards include various requirements for companies to monitor and disclose information
externally as well as internally.

PS1, which acts as an overarching framework for the other standards, requires that companies report to
affected communities on
1) Their environmental and social Action Plans
2) Progress on implementation, and
3) Whether there have been any material changes in the mitigation measures described in the Action Plan.

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING 1

PS1 requires that these reports “…be in a format accessible to the affected communities. The frequency of
these reports will be proportionate to the concerns of affected communities but not less than annually.”1

PS1 also requires internal reporting, whereby a company’s senior management should receive periodic
assessments of the effectiveness of its environmental and social “management program”, based on
systematic data collection and analysis.2

The Performance Standards further fit within a broader policy framework of IFC’s own responsibilities.
These include
UÊ Reviewing assessments of environmental and social risks in any new proposed investments3
UÊ Reviewing the company’s Action Plan to address these risks and identifying additional or corrective
actions to be incorporated in the Action Plan to address any gaps in meeting the Performance Standards
UÊ Disclosing a summary of risks and relevant mitigation measures to the public in advance of any
investment (this is done through IFC’s Disclosure Portal, www.ifc.org/disclosure)
UÊ Checking on an ongoing basis, once investment takes place, that the Action Plan is implemented
and any new risks are mitigated4

In this way, IFC’s Standards set out requirements and recommendations for the kinds of systems that
companies should establish to better manage and mitigate environmental and social risks and impacts.

A crucial part of this is the need to communicate effectively with stakeholders – including communities and
investors – about sustainability in business operations and supply chains. Proactive communication builds
trust and strengthens reputation, which in turn protects a company’s investors and facilitates its ability to
implement strategy. The quality of reporting is also a direct reflection of the company’s own grasp of its
environmental and social performance.

1 External Reporting on Action Plans, section 26

2 PS 1 – Internal Reporting (Para 25), Note: “the management program”
UÊ
Ê«Àœ}À>“ÊœvʓˆÌˆ}>̈œ˜Ê>˜`Ê«iÀvœÀ“>˜Viʈ“«ÀœÛi“i˜Ìʓi>ÃÕÀiÃÊ>˜`Ê>V̈œ˜ÃÊ̅>ÌÊ>``ÀiÃÃÊ̅iʈ`i˜Ìˆwi`ÊÜVˆ>Ê>˜`Ê
environmental risks and impacts
UÊ
œ˜ÃˆÃÌÃʜvÊ>ÊVœ“Lˆ˜>̈œ˜Êœvʜ«iÀ>̈œ˜>Ê«œˆVˆiÃ]Ê«ÀœVi`ÕÀiÃÊ>˜`Ê«À>V̈ViÃ
UÊ >ÞÊ>««ÞÊLÀœ>`ÞÊ>VÀœÃÃÊ̅iÊVˆi˜Ì½ÃʜÀ}>˜ˆâ>̈œ˜]ʜÀÊ̜ÊëiVˆwVÊÈÌiÃ]Êv>VˆˆÌˆiÃ]ʜÀÊ>V̈ۈ̈iÃ
UÊ 7ˆÊ`iw˜iÊ`iÈÀi`ʜÕÌVœ“iÃÊ>Ãʓi>ÃÕÀ>LiÊiÛi˜ÌÃÊ̜Ê̅iÊiÝÌi˜ÌÊ«œÃÈLi]Ê܈̅Êii“i˜ÌÃÊÃÕV…Ê>ÃÊ«iÀvœÀ“>˜Viʈ˜`ˆV>̜ÀÃ]Ê
targets, or acceptance criteria that can be tracked over defined time period, …
3 IFC officers follow a publicly available Environmental and Social Review Procedure when reviewing compliance and
implementation by private sector projects. This is available online at http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/Content/ESRP
4 Ibid

2 GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING

The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) was established in 1997 with the vision that reporting on economic,
environmental, and social performance by all organizations should become as routine and comparable as
financial reporting. In 2006, GRI released G3, the third generation of its now globally recognized framework
for sustainability reporting.

The GRI framework sets out the principles and indicators that any organization can use to measure and report
on its sustainability performance. It also provides detailed guidance to companies of different sizes and in
different sectors on how to navigate the reporting process. This framework has been developed through a
global, multi-stakeholder process and is subject to ongoing revision and updating. It is now the most widely
recognized, international platform for sustainability reporting.

The GRI Guidelines are therefore a global standard that companies can use to publish a public sustainability
report which is relevant to a wide range of stakeholders. By using the Guidelines a company knows it
UÊ Has covered the key issues that most stakeholders are concerned about
UÊ Has used performance indicators and methods for calculating performance data that are accepted
by global experts in these areas
UÊ Is reporting in a way that can be compared with its peers

In addition, the Guidelines steer companies through an examination of the underlying strategies and
systems they have established or need to establish in order to manage environmental, social, economic, and
governance aspects of business operations and engagement with their supply chain and distributors.

The process of preparing a GRI report can therefore be used to promote and guide the development of
structures of management and monitoring that help a company anticipate and respond to an increasing
range of questions from stakeholders.

Due to the strong alignment between the guiding principles of the GRI Framework and IFC Performance
Standards, the content of a company’s sustainability report can therefore be a good starting point for many
of the specific questions an investor like IFC will ask.

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING 3

 The Investor Perspective
Environmental, social and governance (ESG) information has become increasingly important to investors of
all types. At the time of publication of this document, more than 600 investors responsible for approximately
US$20 trillion in assets had committed to the United Nations Principles of Responsible Investment (www.
unpri.org), on the basis that ESG factors can be material to investment decisions.

A number of key sustainability challenges have become areas of intense investor concern, as it has become
more widely recognized that the long-term sustainability of a business is directly tied to its ability to weather
environmental and social trends. For instance, in the case of climate change, investors have recognized that
there will potentially be direct costs and benefits from the emergence of emissions trading schemes, as well
as indirect challenges and opportunities resulting from the geophysical changes and technology shifts that
will be driven by climate change.

However, for investors to integrate ESG performance into their decisions, they require disclosure that is
comprehensive, consistent across markets, and robust. As a result, demand from banks and investors for
quality corporate reporting has grown. This demand has manifested itself through activities ranging from
shareholder engagements with companies, to encouraging regulatory bodies, to enhancing ESG disclosure
requirements in a number of regions.

Investors need a combination of data and analysis of how sustainability relates to and influences the strategy of
the company, as well as comparable performance data that can be used in order to benchmark performance.
Good sustainability reporting can help investors understand the key strategic issues for a company, and also
provides data that can be used to benchmark across a sector or a region.

4 GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING

 
SECTION SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING
AS A BUSINESS PROCESS

What is Sustainability Reporting?

Sustainability Reporting is a form of internal monitoring, management and external communication,
which enables organizations of all sizes to meet the growing information needs of their various stakeholders,
both internal and external. In addition, reporting also helps reinforce internal capacities to engage the full
organization in defining a corporate sustainability strategy, setting public targets, implementing plans, and
reviewing results.

Developed chiefly for the private sector, but now being adopted by cities, NGOs and government agencies
around the world, sustainability reporting captures dimensions of an organization’s practices that have
traditionally not been measured or reported in a systematic way. For this reason, sustainability reports offer a
valuable insight into drivers of organizational performance that may previously have been overlooked.

What type of information is included in a sustainability report?

In the broadest sense a sustainability report is about the economic, social, and environmental aspects of a
company’s operations; the related impacts it has through its everyday activities; and the consequences of those
impacts for the company and others. It can also respond to specific questions from a company’s stakeholders
about key sustainability topics, such as relationships with local communities, protection of human rights,
adaptation to climate change, and corporate governance performance.

Increasingly, the investment community is using sustainability reports to assess how environmental, social,
and corporate governance (ESG) performance might affect their investments. Some companies are combining
their Annual Reports and their Sustainability Reports into an integrated report and are using the Internet in
innovative ways in order to make information easier for investors to find.

A sustainability report should contain information that is material, or, more simply stated, information that matters
to stakeholders so that they can better engage with the company and make informed decisions. Because the
range of a company’s stakeholders may be broad, so will the range of information that may be included.

The GRI Guidelines offer a set of principles and performance indicators that have been developed over more
than 12 years of global, multi-stakeholder dialogue to guide companies on what to report. These can be used
in combination with other tools such as IFC’s Performance Standards and the United Nations Global Compact
Principles (www.unglobalcompact.org), to design internal commitments and management approaches.

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING 5

 Sustainability Reporting and Good Corporate Governance
Transparency is a fundamental component of good corporate governance and serves to build vital relationships
of trust with key partners of any business. These range from shareholders and customers to employees, civil
society and governments. Each has a different relationship with the company and therefore different interests
in its performance.

With the greater understanding of what makes a sustainable business, stakeholders want to know that a
company is not only financially strong but also whether it has properly taken into account, and has systems
to manage, other material aspects of its business. Failure to manage across all dimensions of the business will
be reflected in the results achieved either in terms of direct financial consequences or diminishment of key
intangible assets, such as employee productivity, or tangible and measurable assets, such as customer loyalty.

The King III Code of Corporate Governance in South Africa states that

“Strategy, risk, performance and sustainability have become inseparable” and recommends “integrated
sustainability performance and integrated reporting to enable stakeholders to make a more informed
assessment of the economic value of a company”5

The GRI Guidelines set out the following principles for defining report content and quality:

Content Materiality, Stakeholder inclusiveness, Sustainability context, and Completeness

Quality Balance, Comparability, Accuracy, Timeliness, Reliability, Clarity

Material information will reflect the organization’s “significant economic, environmental, and
social impacts”, or be information that” would substantively influence the assessments and decisions
of stakeholders.”

When determining materiality of report content, GRI’s guidelines state that organizations should also
take into account the basic expectations expressed in the international instruments and standards
with which the organization is expected to comply. In this regard, IFC’s Performance Standards are a
key sustainability benchmark for many companies operating in emerging markets.

5 Institute of Directors Southern Africa (2009) King Code of Corporate Governance for South Africa (King III), pgs 11 and 12

6 GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING

Sustainability Reporting as a Management Process
Through the reporting process, companies identify policies and systems that have to be enhanced in order to
improve performance and communication. This is in line with IFC’s commitment to help clients continuously
improve their environmental and social management systems and thereby their overall business performance.

Sustainability Reporting has external as well as internal benefits for a company. Externally, it
demonstrates a commitment to transparency and builds trust with shareholders, employees, customers,
suppliers, communities, and other business partners.

Internally, when done well, the process of publishing a sustainability report can help a company stimulate
internal communication and alignment of vision, build management systems, develop staff competencies,
and promote behavior change. It can be particularly useful in focusing attention and resources on measuring
and improving performance in line with corporate targets and for identifying gaps in existing practices.

2. To address these issues,

company defines action plans
to implement business cases
with performance targets

1. Company identifies
relevant sustainability issues
and understands how these
are linked to its business

3. Company commits to
performance targets, monitors
and reports annually to
stakeholders, and feeds back
stakeholder perspectives into
company strategy

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING 7

A sustainability report and the reporting process offer ways for a company to channel data collection and
evaluation so that it informs corporate strategy on an annual basis. Many leading companies cite the internal Sustainability
strategic value of reporting as one of the main benefits to their business.
Reporting is a good
For instance, reporting provides a resource for staff to serve as ambassadors and communicate about their
company’s efforts. This in turn helps a company to harness staff input in planning effective sustainability practice because it
strategies and achieving continuous improvement in their operations, products and services.
facilitates and creates
Who should be involved in preparing a sustainability report? a system to engage
Often information about a company’s social and environmental performance as well as economic and corporate
governance aspects will be split between various departments and levels of operations. If this information has stakeholders and
not been collected before, it presents an opportunity to establish a system to gather the needed information
in an effective way and to make sure it is conveyed in a comprehensive and understandable fashion.
reinforce management

Many times, companies will have done a specific social report about their community involvement. They may
systems. It also serves a
also have prepared and submitted environmental reports for environmental authorities. They will often also purpose when there is
have initiatives to improve attraction and retention of employees.
a specific demand for
However, these activities will most likely have been managed by specialists in different areas, such as
community development, engineering, communications or human resources management, who may not be information.
in regular contact with each other.

The sustainability reporting process can facilitate the integration of these various aspects and provide input to
a crosscutting, corporate sustainability strategy. The following are two effective ways to initiate such a process:
UÊ Create a cross-departmental task force to initiate and facilitate the reporting process: the task
force should consist of knowledgeable staff or managers from the relevant areas of company
operations who can ensure that quality data is collected. It should also meet regularly to ensure
that information is shared, compared and integrated effectively in an overall corporate strategy.
UÊ Provide leadership from the top: A senior executive or director should have responsibility and
accountability for the reporting process and final outcome, similar to the annual report process. Clear
direction from the outset will help guide the task force in terms of corporate priorities and messages.
A senior executive can also push the task force to achieve a more ambitious standard and can ensure
that the report aligns with and informs corporate strategy in the most effective way.

The benefit of this kind of corporate structure for sustainability reporting is that, at any time, an investor can
quickly be guided to relevant company contacts with regard to specific sustainability questions.

8 GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING

The following diagram shows an example of reporting responsibilities inside a company:

Board of directors, Chairman and CEO

Senior Executive responsible for

Sustainability Reporting

Operational departments
Cross-departmental
Human Resources
Task Force to plan
Investor Relations
and compile annual
Health & Safety
sustainability report
Environmental management
Community program

Deploy sustainability report content

in different forms and channels
through an integrated
communications strategy

Contact point for

questions from
investors and
the public

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING 9

SECTION
 ENGAGING WITH IFC AS ONE OF THE
STAKEHOLDERS FOR YOUR REPORT

Sustainability Reports are a way for companies to explain in their own words their strategies and systems for
managing social and environmental risk as well as opportunities. For any company, the providers of capital
are a key stakeholder group.

As one such provider, IFC has established a process of assessing performance, risks, and management systems
of potential clients. Sustainability reports can be part of the further sources of information that help IFC
understand the sustainability profile of the companies it seeks to do business with.

There are different ways in which information will be relevant to IFC, which will depend on the particular
client circumstances. For example,
UÊ IFC needs to ensure that recipients of its funding are adhering to the environmental and social
covenants in the investment agreement, including the requirements of the Performance
Standards and Action Plans. IFC maintains a system for this task, which requires that clients
submit an annual report on their performance.
UÊ IFC’s reporting requirements include questions about significant events that may have occurred
during the year and how the company has responded to them.
UÊ IFC will also want to know details about environmental and social management systems. A
general description and organizational diagrams will be relevant for many stakeholders and could act
as starting point when talking to an IFC environmental or social specialist during an appraisal visit.
UÊ Most importantly, IFC will want to know about any environmental and social risks that could
affect the success of the investment partnership and the long-term strength of the business. In
many cases, IFC can assist to address these risks as part of the loan agreement.

In addition, the presence of a report is also relevant for IFC as evidence of the client’s efforts to engage with
different stakeholders. The report itself represents a base of information that can be extracted into other
formats (e.g., websites, incorporated into annual reports) and also demonstrates openness to engagement.

There should be a way to capture feedback and questions from these groups. Specific questions from one
stakeholder group may also improve communication with another stakeholder group.

10 GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING

Opportunities for Involving IFC in the GRI Reporting Process

UÊÃÊޜÕÀÊVœ“«>˜ÞÊ>˜Ê
ÊVˆi˜Ì¶ÊvÊÜ]Ê̅i˜Ê̅iÊ
Ê-ÕÃÌ>ˆ˜>LˆˆÌÞÊ*iÀvœÀ“>˜ViÊ-Ì>˜`>À`ÃÊÊ
Ê >ÀiÊ>ʎiÞÊLi˜V…“>ÀŽÊ̅>ÌÊޜÕÊŜՏ`ÊVœ˜Ãˆ`iÀÊvœÀÊޜÕÀÊÀi«œÀÌ°
Preparation

UÊ9œÕÀÊ,‡Ài«œÀÌÊV>˜Ê«ÀœÛˆ`iÊ`iÃVÀˆ«Ìˆœ˜ÃÊ̜Ê
ʜvÊivvœÀÌÃÊ̜Êi˜}>}iÊ܈̅Ê`ˆvviÀi˜ÌÊ
Ê ÃÌ>Ži…œ`iÀÃÊ>ÃÊÜiÊ>ÃÊLiˆ˜}Ê>Ê̜œÊvœÀÊÃÌ>Ži…œ`iÀÊ`ˆ>œ}Õi°
Consulting with
stakeholders

UÊ
Ê܈Ê…>Ûiʈ`i˜Ìˆvˆi`ÊÃÕÃÌ>ˆ˜>LˆˆÌÞÊ«iÀvœÀ“>˜ViʈÃÃÕiÃÊ`ÕÀˆ˜}Ê>««À>ˆÃ>ÊœÀÊ
ÃÕ«iÀۈȜ˜]Ê܅ˆV…ÊޜÕÀÊVœ“«>˜Þʘii`ÃÊ̜Ê>``ÀiÃðÊ/…ˆÃÊVœÕ`ʈ˜vœÀ“Ê܅>ÌÊVœ˜Ìi˜ÌÊޜÕÊ
VœÛiÀʈ˜ÊޜÕÀÊÀi«œÀÌ°
Planning

UÊ>Ì>Ê̅>ÌÊޜÕÀÊVœ“«>˜ÞÊVœiVÌÃʈ˜ÊœÀ`iÀÊ̜ÊÀi«œÀÌÊ̜Ê
ÊVœÕ`ÊLiÊÕÃi`ʈ˜Ê>Ê«ÕLˆV]Ê
Ê ,ÊÃÕÃÌ>ˆ˜>LˆˆÌÞÊÀi«œÀÌ°
Data collection

UÊ1˜`iÀÊ>««Àœ«Àˆ>ÌiÊVˆÀVՓÃÌ>˜ViÃ]Ê>˜Ê
ÊÃÌ>vvʓi“LiÀÊVœÕ`Ê«ÀœÛˆ`iÊvii`L>VŽÊœ˜ÊÊ
Ê `À>vÌÃʜvÊޜÕÀÊÀi«œÀÌ°
Writing, Review
and Editing

UÊ
]ʏˆŽiʜ̅iÀÊÀi>`iÀÃ]Ê܈ÊÜ>˜ÌÊ>ÃÃÕÀ>˜ViÊ̅>ÌʘœÌ…ˆ˜}ÊÈ}˜ˆvˆV>˜Ìʅ>ÃÊLii˜ÊivÌʜÕÌÊÊ
Ê >˜`Ê̅>ÌÊ̅iʈ˜vœÀ“>̈œ˜Êˆ˜Ê̅iÊÀi«œÀÌʈÃÊÀiˆ>Li°Ê ÝÌiÀ˜>Ê>ÃÃÕÀ>˜ViʜÀÊÛiÀˆvˆV>̈œ˜ÊV>˜ÊÊ
External Ê …i«Ê>V…ˆiÛiÊ}Ài>ÌiÀÊVÀi`ˆLˆˆÌÞÊvœÀÊޜÕÀÊÀi«œÀÌ°Ê
verification

UÊiV>Àˆ˜}Ê>Ê,Ê
««ˆV>̈œ˜ÊiÛiÊ­
ÊvœÀÊLi}ˆ˜˜iÀÃ]Ê ÊvœÀʈ˜ÌiÀ“i`ˆ>Ìi]ʜÀÊ
ÊvœÀÊ
Ê Vœ“«Ài…i˜ÃˆÛi®ÊiÌÃÊÀi>`iÀÃʎ˜œÜʅœÜʓÕV…ÊœvÊ̅iÊ,ÊՈ`iˆ˜iÃÊޜÕʅ>ÛiÊVœÛiÀi`°
GRI Application
Level

UÊ
œ˜}À>ÌՏ>̈œ˜Ãʜ˜Ê>՘V…ˆ˜}ÊޜÕÀÊÀi«œÀÌtÊ ÃÌ>LˆÃ…Ê>ÊVœ˜Ì>VÌÊ«œˆ˜ÌÊ̜ÊÀi뜘`Ê̜ÊÊ
Ê µÕiÃ̈œ˜Ã°ÊvÊ
Ê>ÎÃÊvœÀʓœÀiʈ˜vœÀ“>̈œ˜Ê̅i˜Ê̅ˆÃÊV>˜Ê…i«Êˆ˜vœÀ“ÊvÕÌÕÀiÊ
Production and Ê Ài«œÀ̈˜}ÊVÞViðÊÊÊ
Launch

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING 11

The IFC Appraisal and Supervision process
IFC monitors the environmental and social performance of its investments and manages associated risks at
the beginning of an investment and as part of its ongoing portfolio management.

The scope and regularity of reporting that IFC requires from clients are determined for each investment
depending on
UÊ The sector and type of business
UÊ The nature and level of risks identified
UÊ The nature of the investment (e.g. loan or equity)

These aspects are explained to the public through IFC’s Disclosure Portal (www.ifc.org/disclosure) for every
investment before approval by IFC’s Board of Directors.

Information is used during the Appraisal stage to

UÊ Understand the nature of the business (governance, strategy, systems)
UÊ Ascertain the scope of impact of the company’s operations (affected stakeholders; scope of
influence)
UÊ Assess environmental and social impacts and risks
UÊ Assess the company’s Action Plan to address their environmental and social risks and impacts
UÊ Identify business opportunities that can be achieved through greater sustainability (e.g. efficient
energy use, more effective waste management, improved labor standards)

Information is used during the Supervision stage to

UÊ Monitor implementation of Action Plans and ensure that the client remains in compliance with
the Performance Standards
UÊ Identify any new risks arising from operations (e.g. environmental impacts or relations with
employees or the community)
UÊ Assist companies to improve their E&S management systems and performance over time
UÊ Work with the client to develop business opportunities through sustainability (e.g. carbon finance,
renewable energy, access to finance for women)
 
SECTION PRACTICAL ALIGNMENT OF IFC AND
GRI REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The GRI Framework is designed to help organizations understand the range of sustainability issues that are
most frequently faced by businesses and communicate more effectively with stakeholders.

The following section explains how companies can link their GRI-based, sustainability reporting activities with
IFC’s own information needs. It also provides an indication of the types of information and engagement that
other types of investors may begin seeking more actively in the future.

The GRI framework requires information on three main levels:

Strategy & Analysis High-level

Organization Profile information that
1. Corporate Governance would be valuable
Commitments and Engagement to any investor

Strategies and
Disclosure on Management Approach (DMA) systems for managing
2. and performance indicators sustainability risk and
opportunity

Environmental indicators Material performance

(e.g. energy, emissions, water, biodiversity)
3. Social indicators (e.g. labor*, human rights, society)
information according
to key categories
Economic indicators (e.g. employment, taxes)

*The GRI framework includes occupational health and safety (OHS) under the topic of labor. OHS is often
included under environmental performance in other contexts.

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING 13

The following tables show the alignment between the GRI framework and IFC’s own information needs:

IFC requirements GRI Disclosures

IFC promotes principles of good corporate governance Corporate Governance Commitments and Engagement
and seeks evidence of good corporate governance in
potential client companies (see www.gcgf.org)

IFC requirements GRI Disclosures

Performance Standard 1 (PS1) on Social and Disclosures on Management Approach
Environmental Assessment and Management Systems

IFC Performance Standard 1 (PS1) specifically requires that the client “establish and maintain a Social and
Environmental Management System appropriate to the nature and scale of the project and commensurate
with the level of social and environmental risks and impacts.

The Management System will incorporate the following elements: (i) Social and Environmental Assessment; (ii)
management program; (iii) organizational capacity; (iv) training; (v) community engagement; (vi) monitoring;
and (vii) reporting.”6

IFC requirements GRI Performance

Indicators
PS2: Labor and Working Conditions Labor Practices
PS3: Pollution Prevention and Abatement Environment
PS4: Community Health, Safety, and Security Society
PS5: Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement Society (Indirectly covered)
PS6: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Natural Resource Management Environment
PS7: Indigenous Peoples Human Rights

PS8: Cultural Heritage Not covered

On the following pages, we show in greater detail how these two frameworks overlap. PS8 on Cultural
Heritage is not covered in this comparison, as the GRI framework currently doesn’t address this area.

6 IFC Performance Standard 1, Social and Environmental Management System, Page 1

14 GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING

Capturing Stakeholder Perspectives
In addition to performance requirements, IFC uses a stakeholder framework to assess the potential and
actual development impacts of the projects it finances. This framework illustrates who may gain and who
may lose from a project and helps to assess the distribution of impacts on society.

No project engagement affects stakeholders equally. It is therefore necessary to understand the differences
between and within stakeholder groups. For instance, within a community, men, women, and people of
different ages or status may be affected by the project in different ways.

Equally, the reporting, disclosure, and ongoing communication with these stakeholders should be tailored to
varying levels of education, access to information, and need for information about how they will be affected.
Reporting should be combined with forums for two-way engagement, particularly during the planning and
implementation of projects. This helps ensure that stakeholder views can be addressed and incorporated.

Finally, the impacts of the company or project should be assessed in terms of how well it improves the
livelihoods and living conditions of different stakeholder groups. For these purposes, impact indicators should
be tailored to best respond to the particular context and needs of the project and stakeholders.

For more information on how IFC measures development effectiveness, visit www.ifc.org/results

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING 15

 IFC Performance Related GRI G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Standard Disclosures
Standards on Social
& Environmental Strategy and Profile Management Performance Indicators
Sustainability Approach

Performance Standard 1: UÊ 3.5 Process of defining report content, UÊ Economic + Environmental UÊ EC8: Development and impact
Social and Environmental including: Determining materiality, + Labor Practices and of infrastructure investments
Assessment and Management Prioritizing topics within the report; and Decent Work + Human and services provided primarily
Systems Identifying stakeholders the organization Rights + Society +Product for public benefit through
expects to use the report. (I, III, ii, viii) Responsibility: Disclosure commercial, in-kind, or pro bono
Objectives on Management engagement. (I)
UÊ 3.6 Boundary of the report (e.g., countries,
UÊ (I) To identify and assess social Approach. (II, IV, I, iv, vii) UÊ EC9: Understanding and
divisions, subsidiaries, leased facilities, joint
and environmental impacts, both ventures, suppliers). (viii) For each of the topics describing significant indirect
adverse and beneficial, in the above (environment, economic impacts, including the
project’s area of influence UÊ 3.7 State any specific limitations on the
scope or boundary of the report. If boundary labor, etc.), the company extent of impacts. (I)
UÊ (II) To avoid, or where avoidance and scope do not address the full range should describe its UÊ EN14 Strategies, current actions,
is not possible, to minimize, of material economic, environmental, and management approach and future plans for managing
mitigate, or compensate for social impacts of the organization, state the including: impacts on biodiversity. (I)
adverse impacts on workers, strategy and projected timeline for providing 1. goals and performance UÊ EN26 Initiatives to mitigate
affected communities, and the complete coverage. (I, III, ii, viii)
2. policy environmental impacts of products
environment
UÊ 3.9 Data measurement techniques and the and services, and extent of impact
3. organizational
UÊ (III) To ensure that affected bases of calculations, including assumptions mitigation. (I)
responsibility
communities are appropriately and techniques, underlying estimations UÊ SO1: Nature, scope, and
engaged on issues that could applied to the compilation of the Indicators, 4. training and awareness
effectiveness of any programs and
potentially affect them and other information in the report. (IV, i) 5. monitoring and follow-up practices that assess and manage
UÊ (IV) To promote improved social UÊ 4.11 Explanation of whether and how 6. additional contextual the impacts of operations on
and environment performance of the precautionary approach or principle is information communities, including entering,
companies through effective use addressed by the organization. (II) operating, and exiting. (I, III)
of management systems References to the
UÊ 4.14 List of stakeholder groups engaged by “Disclosures on Management
Requirements the organization. (III, vi) Approach” (DMA) in the rest
UÊ (i) Social and Environmental UÊ 4.15 Basis for identification and selection of of this document refer to the
Management System stakeholders with whom to engage. (III, vi) above six points.
UÊ (ii) Social and Environmental UÊ 4.16 Approaches to stakeholder
Assessment engagement, including frequency of
UÊ (iii) Management Program engagement by type and by stakeholder
group. (III, vi)
UÊ (iv) Organizational Capacity
UÊ 4.17 Key topics and concerns that
UÊ (v) Training have been raised through stakeholder
UÊ (vi) Community Engagement engagement, and how the organization has
responded to those key topics and concerns,
UÊ (vii) Monitoring
including through its reporting. (III, vi, viii)
UÊ (viii) Reporting

16 GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING

 IFC Performance GRI G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Standard Disclosures
Standards on Social
& Environmental Strategy and Management
Sustainability Performance Indicators
Profile Approach
Performance Standard 2: UÊ 3.6 Boundary of UÊ Labor Practices UÊ HR1 Percentage and total number of significant investment agreements that include human
Labor and Working the report (e.g., and Decent Work rights clauses or that have undergone human rights screening. (II, III, I, ii, iv, v)
Conditions countries, divisions, + Human Rights: UÊ HR2 Percentage of significant suppliers and contractors that have undergone screening on
subsidiaries, leased Disclosure on human rights and actions taken. (iv, v)
Objectives facilities, joint Management UÊ HR3 Total hours of employee training on policies and procedures concerning aspects of
UÊ To establish, maintain ventures, suppliers). Approach. (I, II, III, human rights that are relevant to operations, including the percentage of employees
and improve the worker- (iv, v) IV, i, ii, iii, iv, v) trained. (II, III, ii)
management relationship (I) UÊ 3.7 State any UÊ HR4 Total number of incidents of discrimination and actions taken. (I, II, i)
UÊ To promote the fair specific limitations UÊ HR5 Operations identified in which the right to exercise freedom of association and
treatment, non- on the scope or collective bargaining may be at significant risk, and actions taken to support these rights.
discrimination and equal boundary of the (II, i)
opportunity of workers, report. If boundary
and scope do UÊ HR6 Operations identified as having significant risk for incidents of child labor, and
and compliance with measures taken to contribute to the elimination of child labor. (ii)
national labor and not address the
full range of UÊ HR7 Operations identified as having significant risk for incidents of forced or compulsory
employment laws (II)
material economic, labor, and measures to contribute to the elimination of forced or compulsory labor. (ii)
UÊ To protect the workforce by environmental, and UÊ LA1 Total workforce by employment type, employment contract, and region.
addressing child labor and social impacts of the UÊ LA2 Total number and rate of employee turnover by age group, gender, and region.
forced labor (III) organization, state UÊ LA3 Benefits provided to full-time employees that are not provided to temporary or part-
UÊ To promote safe and the strategy and time employees, by major operations.
healthy working conditions projected timeline
for providing UÊ LA4 Percentage of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements.
and promote the health of
workers (IV) complete coverage. UÊ LA5 Minimum notice period(s) regarding operational changes, including whether it is
(iv, v) specified in collective agreements.
Requirements
UÊ LA6 Percentage of total workforce represented in formal joint management–worker health
UÊ Working Conditions and and safety committees that help monitor and advise on occupational health and safety
Management of Worker programs.e
Relationship (i)
UÊ LA7 Rates of injury, occupational diseases, lost days, and absenteeism, and number of
UÊ Protecting the Work Force work-related fatalities by region.ore
(ii) UÊ LA8 Education, training, counseling, prevention, and risk-control programs in place to assist
UÊ Occupational Health and workforce members, their families, or community members regarding serious diseases. (iii)
Safety (iii) UÊ LA9 Health and safety topics covered in formal agreements with trade unions. (iii)
UÊ Non-employee Workers (iv) UÊ LA10 Average hours of training per year per employee by employee category.
UÊ Supply Chain (v) UÊ LA11 Programs for skills management and lifelong learning that support the continued
employability of employees and assist them in managing career endings.
UÊ LA12 Percentage of employees receiving regular performance and career development
reviews.
UÊ LA13 Composition of governance bodies and breakdown of employees per category
according to gender, age group, minority, group membership, and other indicators of
diversity.
UÊ LA14 Ratio of basic salary of men to women by employee category.

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING 17

 IFC Performance GRI G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Standard Disclosures
Standards on Social
& Environmental Strategy Management
Sustainability Performance Indicators
and Profile Approach

Performance Standard 3: UÊ Environmental: UÊ EN1 Materials used by weight or volume. (i)

Pollution Prevention and Disclosure on UÊ EN2 Percentage of materials used that are recycled input materials. (i)
Abatement Management
UÊ EN3 Direct energy consumption by primary energy source. (i, iii)
Approach. (I, II)
Objectives UÊ EN4 Indirect energy consumption by primary source. (i, iii)
UÊ (I) To avoid or minimize UÊ EN5 Energy saved due to conservation and efficiency improvements. (i, iii)
adverse impacts on UÊ EN6 Initiatives to provide energy-efficient or renewable energy based products
human health and the and services, and reductions in energy requirements as a result of these
environment by avoiding or initiatives. (i, iii)
minimizing pollution from UÊ EN7 Initiatives to reduce indirect energy consumption and reductions achieved.
project activities
UÊ EN10 Percentage and total volume of water recycled and reused. (i, ii)
UÊ (II) To promote the
UÊ EN11 Location and size of land owned, leased, managed in, or adjacent to,
reduction of emissions
protected areas, and areas of high biodiversity value outside protected areas. *(ii)
that contribute to climate
change UÊ EN12 Description of significant impacts of activities, products, and services
on biodiversity in protected areas and areas of high biodiversity value outside
Requirements protected areas. *(ii)
UÊ (i) General Requirements UÊ EN13 Habitats protected or restored. *(ii)
UÊ (ii) Ambient Considerations UÊ EN14 Strategies, current actions, and future plans for managing impacts on
UÊ (iii) Greenhouse Gas biodiversity. *(ii)
Emissions UÊ EN15 Number of IUCN Red List species and national conservation list species
with habitats in areas affected by operations, by level of extinction risk. *(ii)
UÊ (iv) Effluents
UÊ EN16 Total direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight. (iii)
UÊ (v) Pesticide Use and
UÊ EN17 Other relevant indirect greenhouse gas emissions by weight. (iii)
Management
UÊ EN18 Initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reductions achieved. (iii)
UÊ EN19 Emissions of ozone-depleting substances by weight. (iii)
UÊ EN20 NOx, SOx, and other significant air emissions by type and weight. (iii)
UÊ EN8 Total water withdrawal by source. (i)
UÊ EN21 Total water discharge by quality and destination. (iv)
UÊ EN22 Total weight of waste by type and disposal method. (ii, iv)
UÊ EN23 Total number and volume of significant spills. (ii, iv)
UÊ EN24 Weight of transported, imported, exported, or treated waste deemed
hazardous under the terms of the Basel Convention Annex I, II, III, and VIII, and
percentage of transported waste shipped internationally. (ii, iv, v)
UÊ EN25 Identity, size, protected status, and biodiversity value of water bodies and
related habitats significantly affected by the reporting organization’s discharges
of water and runoff. *(ii)

* See also PS 6 on Biodiversity

18 GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING

 GRI G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Standard Disclosures
IFC Performance Standards
on Social & Environmental
Sustainability Management
Strategy and Profile Performance Indicators
Approach

Performance Standard 4: UÊ 4.11 Explanation of UÊ Society + Human UÊ SO1 Nature, scope, and effectiveness of
Community Health, Safety and Security whether and how the Rights: Disclosure any programs and practices that assess
precautionary approach on Management and manage the impacts of operations on
Objectives or principle is addressed Approach. (I, II) communities, including entering, operating,
UÊ (I) To avoid or minimize risks to and impacts by the organization. (I) and exiting. (i)
on the health and safety of the local UÊ HR8 Percentage of security personnel trained
community during the project life cycle from in the organization’s policies or procedures
both routine and non-routine circumstances concerning aspects of human rights that are
UÊ (II) To ensure that the safeguarding of relevant to operations. (ii)
personnel and property is carried out in a
legitimate manner that avoids or minimizes
risks to the community’s safety and security
Requirements
UÊ (i) Community Health and Safety
Requirements
UÊ (ii) Security Personnel Requirements

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING 19

 GRI G3 Sustainability Reporting
Guidelines Standard Disclosures
IFC Performance Standards on Social &
Environmental Sustainability
Management Performance
Strategy and Profile
Approach Indicators

Performance Standard 5: UÊ 4.14 List of stakeholder UÊ Society : Disclosure UÊ SO1 Nature, scope,
Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement groups engaged by the on Management and effectiveness of
organization. (I, II, i) Approach. (I, II, any programs and
Objectives III, IV) practices that assess
UÊ 4.15 Basis for
UÊ (I) To avoid or at least minimize involuntary resettlement wherever and manage the
identification and
feasible by exploring alternative project designs impacts of operations
selection of stakeholders
on communities,
UÊ (II) To mitigate adverse social and economic impacts from land acquisition with whom to engage.
including entering,
or restrictions on affected persons’ use of land by: (i) providing (I, II, i)
operating, and
compensation for loss of assets at replacement cost; and (ii) ensuring UÊ 4.16 Approaches exiting. (I, II, III, IV, i,
that resettlement activities are implemented with appropriate disclosure to stakeholder ii, iii)
of information, consultation, and the informed participation of those engagement,
affected including frequency of
UÊ (III) To improve or at least restore the livelihoods and standards of living engagement by type and
of displaced persons by stakeholder group.
(I, II, i)
UÊ (IV) To improve living conditions among displaced persons through
provision of adequate housing with security of tenure at resettlement sites
Requirements
UÊ (i) General Requirements
UÊ (ii) Displacement
UÊ (iii) Private Sector Responsibilities under Government-Managed
Resettlement

20 GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING

 GRI G3 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Standard Disclosures
IFC Performance Standards on Social &
Environmental Sustainability Strategy Management
Performance Indicators
& Profile Approach

Performance Standard 6: UÊ Environmental: UÊ EN11 Location and size of land owned, leased,
Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Natural Disclosure on managed in, or adjacent to, protected areas, and
Resource Management Management areas of high biodiversity value outside protected
Approach. (I, II, areas. (I, i)
Objectives
i, ii) UÊ EN12 Description of significant impacts of activities,
UÊ (I) To protect and conserve biodiversity
products, and services on biodiversity in protected
UÊ (II) To promote the sustainable management and use of areas and areas of high biodiversity value outside
natural resources through the adoption of practices that protected areas. (I, i)
integrate conservation needs and development priorities
UÊ EN13 Habitats protected or restored. (I, i)
Requirements
UÊ EN14 Strategies, current actions, and future plans for
UÊ (i) Protection and Conservation of Biodiversity managing impacts on biodiversity. (I, II, i, ii)
UÊ (ii) Management and Use of Renewable Resources UÊ EN15 Number of IUCN Red List species and national
conservation list species with habitats in areas
affected by operations, by level of extinction risk. (I, i)

GRI G3 Sustainability Reporting

Guidelines Standard Disclosures
IFC Performance Standards on Social &
Environmental Sustainability
Strategy and Management Performance
Profile Approach Indicators

Performance Standard 7: UÊ 4.14 List of UÊ Society + UÊ SO1 Nature, scope,

Indigenous people stakeholder groups Human Rights: and effectiveness
Objectives engaged by the Disclosure on of any programs
organization. (I, III) Management and practices that
UÊ (I) To ensure that the development process fosters full respect for the dignity, human Approach. (I, II, assess and manage
rights, aspirations, cultures and natural resource-based livelihoods of Indigenous people UÊ 4.15 Basis for
identification V, III, IV) the impacts of
UÊ (II) To avoid adverse impacts of projects on communities of Indigenous Peoples, or when and selection of operations on
avoidance is not feasible, to minimize, mitigate, or compensate for such impacts, and to stakeholders with communities,
provide opportunities for development benefits, in a culturally appropriate manner whom to engage. including entering,
UÊ (III) To establish and maintain an ongoing relationship with the Indigenous Peoples (I, III) operating, and
affected by a project throughout the life of the project UÊ 4.16 Approaches exiting. (i, ii)
UÊ (IV) To foster good faith negotiation with and informed participation of Indigenous to stakeholder UÊ HR9 Total number
Peoples when projects are to be located on traditional or customary lands under use by engagement, of incidents of
Indigenous Peoples including frequency violations involving
UÊ (V) To respect and preserve the culture, knowledge and practices of Indigenous Peoples of engagement rights of indigenous
Requirements by type and by people and actions
stakeholder group. taken. (I, II)
UÊ (i) General Requirements
(III, IV)
UÊ (ii) Development Benefits
UÊ (iii) Special Requirements

GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING 21

 Reporting on Gender
The case for promoting gender equality is driven by multiple factors. Beyond a legal and moral imperative,
there are also business reasons for doing so – such as improved reputation and employee morale, and
attracting and keeping talented employees.

However, to date, there has been a limited level of coverage of gender issues in sustainability reports and
specifically a low frequency of reporting against GRI’s three gender-related indicators:

LA2 Total number and rate of employee turnover by age group, gender, and region
LA13 Composition of governance bodies and breakdown of employees per category according to gender, age group,
minority group membership, and other indicators of
LA14 Ratio of basic salary of men to women by employee category

In 2009, IFC and GRI published a Practitioner’s Guide to “Embedding Gender in Sustainability Reporting”.
The Guide aims to assist companies in understanding the value that women add to the workplace, and
identifying ways to better support women employees. IFC is also contributing to the GRI working group
which is formulating formal recommendations to GRI’s Technical Advisory Committee regarding gender
related updates to the G3 Guidelines.

Similarly, gender is one of the emerging issues being addressed during the update of IFC’s Performance
Standards in 2010. It is expected that gender issues will be covered by general requirements in IFC’s Performance
Standards that protect all members of the work force, and reduce risks and impacts to all communities, e.g.:
UÊ PS1 underscores the need to consider gender differences during a project’s life-cycle.
UÊ PS2 requires clients to provide working conditions that are safe and non-discriminatory.
UÊ PS4 addresses community health, safety and security issues.
UÊ PS5 includes targeted measures to help ensure that women’s perspectives are obtained and their
interests factored into all aspects of resettlement planning and implementation, particularly in
respect to compensation and benefits.
UÊ PS7 calls for an engagement with Indigenous People that specifically considers women’s role in the
management and use of the land and natural resources.
UÊ PS9 requires clients to identify stakeholders, including those that are disadvantaged or vulnerable,
which may or may not include women.

22 GETTING MORE VALUE OUT OF SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING

Further resources on sustainability reporting are available from the GRI and IFC
websites and GRI-certified training now exists in many markets. For more
information on how IFC supports clients in sustainability strategies and reporting,
contact Luis Iseppe, [email protected].

Resources:
GRI G3 Framework and Sector Supplements
http://www.globalreporting.org/ReportingFramework/G3Guidelines/

IFC Performance Standards

http://www.ifc.org/envsocstandards

IFC Good Practice Publications

http://www.ifc.org/enviropublications

IFC, 2007, Stakeholder Engagement: A Good Practice Handbook for Companies

Doing Business in Emerging Markets
http://www.ifc.org/enviropublications

IFC and GRI, 2009, Embedding Gender in Sustainability Reporting

http://www.ifc.org/gender

Acknowledgements
This publication was made possible thanks to the inputs of the following IFC and
GRI staff and external contributors:
Editorial Team: Sean Gilbert and Bastian Buck (GRI) and Louise Gardiner (IFC)
IFC Reviewers: Mike Wallace (GRI), Motoko Aizawa, Maria Arsenova, Stephen
Bailey, Rong Chen, Josefina Doumbia, Jouni Eerikainen, Lucie Giraud, Anna Hidalgo,
Luis Iseppe, Reidar Kvam, Brunno Maradei, Euan Marshall, Piotr Mazurkiewicz,
Roland Michelitsch, John Middleton, Alan Miller, Carmen Niethammer, Mandar
Parasnis, Aaron Rosenberg, Houria Sammari, Akira Tanabe, Shaza Zeinelabdin and
Rong Zhang (IFC)
External Reviewers: David Logan and Megan DeYoung (Corporate Citizenship),
Jean-Philippe Renaut (SustainAbility Ltd), and Marc de Sousa-Shields (ESGlobal)
“Sustainability reporting is important for companies in emerging markets,
where credibility, transparency and the trust of stakeholders are so crucial to
business success. The GRI Guidelines offer a consolidated framework, one
international reporting language as it were, referencing the most important
international standards of performance. This framework has been created with
the involvement of stakeholders from emerging markets and is widely used
around the world. Through this Good Practice Note on Sustainability reporting,
the IFC and the GRI aim to demonstrate how reporting can be linked with IFC’s
Environmental and Social Sustainability Policy and Performance Standards.”
Ernst Ligteringen, Chief Executive, Global Reporting Initiative

IFC Global Reporting Initiative

2121 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. P.O. Box 10039
Washington, D.C. 20433 USA 1001 EA
Telephone: +1 202 473-1000 Amsterdam
Facsimile: +1 202 974-4384 The Netherlands
Internet: www.ifc.org Telephone: +31 20 531-0000
Facsimile: +31 20 531-0031

© 2010 INTERNATIONAL FINANCE CORPORATION and GLOBAL REPORTING INITIATIVE

All rights reserved
First printing, June 2010

The findings, interpretations, views, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the authors
and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of the International Finance
Corporation or of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the World Bank)
or the governments they represent.

Rights and Permissions

Content from this document may be used freely and copied into other formats without prior
permission provided that clear attribution is given to the original source.
© All photographs and other images courtesy of IFC