Global sustainability reporting standards are becoming essential for companies globally as a result of increased environmental concerns and growing calls for ethical corporate governance. These standards enable companies to communicate their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) efforts transparently and accountably, meeting the expectations of investors, regulators, and stakeholders. At the forefront of this movement is the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB), a global initiative that is rapidly gaining traction. As jurisdictions representing over half of the world’s economic output adopt or transition toward the ISSB framework, it is evident that the momentum for standardized sustainability reporting is accelerating. With global consistency in ESG disclosures, businesses are increasingly empowered to align their sustainability goals with financial performance, ensuring long-term value creation in a more sustainable and accountable world.

This article was written by Iman Zalinyan.  Iman ([email protected]) is part of RSM Netherlands Business Consulting Services, with a strong focus on ESG and Strategy matters.

The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation officially launched the ISSB in 2021, recognizing the need for a unified global baseline for sustainability disclosures. This initiative was driven by the fragmented nature of existing sustainability reporting frameworks, often leading to inconsistencies and confusion among stakeholders. The ISSB's primary objective is to streamline sustainability reporting, making it easier for companies to disclose their ESG performance comparably and reliably worldwide.

Building on the foundations laid by previous initiatives, the ISSB integrates the best practices from frameworks like the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). However, what sets the ISSB apart is its ambition to serve as a universal standard applicable across all sectors and regions, thereby eliminating the redundancies and conflicts that have long plagued sustainability reporting.

Current Adoption of ISSB Standards

As of today, the ISSB standards have gained significant traction globally. Twenty jurisdictions, accounting for approximately 55% of global GDP, have either adopted the ISSB standards or are in the process of doing so. This widespread adoption is a testament to the growing recognition of the importance of standardized sustainability reporting.

Regions like Europe and Asia are leading the charge, with countries like the United Kingdom, Japan, and South Korea committing to fully adopting the ISSB framework. In contrast, other regions, including parts of the Americas and Africa, are still in the early stages of adoption but are showing promising signs of progress. The adoption of ISSB standards has far-reaching economic implications. Jurisdictions that have embraced these standards represent a significant portion of the global economy, and their commitment to standardized sustainability reporting is expected to drive positive economic outcomes.

Despite the growing momentum, the global adoption of ISSB standards is not without challenges. Different regions face unique barriers, ranging from regulatory constraints to cultural and economic differences. For example, in emerging markets, the cost of implementing new reporting standards can be prohibitive, while in developed markets, existing regulations may conflict with the ISSB framework. Regulatory challenges are particularly pronounced as governments and regulatory bodies grapple with integrating the ISSB standards into their legal frameworks. Additionally, cultural differences in how sustainability is perceived and prioritized can challenge widespread adoption. To address these challenges, the ISSB has introduced transition periods and modifications that allow jurisdictions to gradually adopt the standards while addressing their unique needs and constraints. These measures are designed to ease the adoption process and ensure that the ISSB standards can be implemented effectively across different regions.

ISSB and CSRD: Differences, Overlap, and Strategic Approaches

For companies operating in multiple jurisdictions, particularly those with European operations, the dual demands of navigating both the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) frameworks can be complex. However, with the right strategy, companies can successfully manage both and gain a competitive edge in the global marketplace.

Differences

A key difference between the ISSB and CSRD lies in their approach to materiality. The ISSB framework focuses on single materiality, meaning it requires companies to disclose sustainability issues that directly impact their financial performance. In contrast, the CSRD mandates a double materiality approach, which means companies must also report on how their activities affect the environment and society at large, in addition to financial materiality.

To navigate this difference effectively, companies should begin by conducting a thorough materiality assessment. This assessment will help determine which ESG issues are most relevant to their operations, investors, and wider stakeholders. By understanding the materiality expectations of both frameworks, companies can tailor their sustainability disclosures to meet the specific requirements of each, ensuring compliance while addressing the concerns of diverse audiences.

Overlap

While ISSB and CSRD differ in scope, there are significant areas of overlap, particularly in climate-related disclosures. Both frameworks emphasize the need for transparent reporting on climate risks, greenhouse gas emissions, and sustainability strategies aligned with the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD).

Companies can streamline their reporting processes by aligning their internal data collection practices to simultaneously meet the requirements of both frameworks. This involves creating a unified data management system that collects ESG information consistently, reducing administrative burdens and ensuring uniform reporting across different jurisdictions. By leveraging the commonalities between ISSB and CSRD, companies can maintain efficiency while meeting global and regional compliance requirements.

Strategic approach

Navigating multiple reporting frameworks can be resource-intensive. To simplify the process, companies should invest in technology and data platforms that support compliance with both ISSB and CSRD standards. By using technology to centralize ESG data management, companies can ensure their reports are accurate, consistent, and aligned with global best practices. This also minimizes the risk of duplication and errors, allowing businesses to focus on enhancing their sustainability performance rather than grappling with compliance complexity.

Navigating the complexities of both the ISSB and CSRD frameworks can be challenging, particularly for companies with global operations. Engaging ESG experts with in-depth knowledge of both frameworks can provide valuable guidance. 
Expert advice can be especially beneficial in interpreting the nuanced requirements of each framework and applying them to the company’s specific context. By doing so, businesses can leverage their sustainability reporting to attract investors, enhance operational resilience, and build stronger relationships with stakeholders.

Forward-thinking

As more jurisdictions embrace the ISSB framework, its adoption is set to shape the future of global sustainability reporting. The ISSB is poised to become the global benchmark for sustainability disclosures, setting a common standard that facilitates comparability and transparency across industries and regions. For companies and investors alike, aligning with ISSB standards will be crucial to thriving in an increasingly sustainability-conscious world.

In Europe, where the CSRD is leading regulatory efforts, companies will need to navigate the dual demands of global (ISSB) and regional (CSRD) reporting frameworks. While this may seem daunting, companies that successfully align their internal reporting processes and engage with both investors and broader stakeholders will be well-positioned to reap the strategic benefits of sustainability leadership. By embracing both ISSB and CSRD standards, companies not only comply with evolving regulatory expectations but also gain a competitive edge, access to investment, and the opportunity to drive meaningful change in their industries. 

RSM is a thought leader in the field of Sustainability and Strategy Consulting. We offer frequent insights through training and sharing of thought leadership that is based on a detailed knowledge of regulatory obligations and practical applications in working with our customers. If you want to know more, please reach out to one of our consultants.