Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) CEO, Janine Guillot, believes that the IFRS Foundation’s Consultation Paper on Sustainability Reporting is the most significant development in accounting standard-setting since the creation the IASB in 2001. And, with the stakes this high, she argues that it’s crucial to get it right.
This week has seen a flurry of new developments in the UK’s sustainability reporting space, taking the country another step closer to the useful, comparable, environmental data investors and regulators need.
This week the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) published its annual Status Report, showing significant growth in the number of supporting organisations and amount of investor demand.
Banks’ ability to carry out climate change related stress tests could be vastly improved by standardisation of corporate ESG risk disclosures, according to a new report published by Fitch Ratings.
To achieve the world’s current carbon-neutral goals, we need high-quality non-financial data in order to assess businesses’ impact on environmental and social matters.
Following the recent announcement that the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) is working with PwC to develop an XBRL taxonomy, Wes Bricker, vice chair of PwC US and Mexico and Vice Chair of XBRL International’s Board of Directors, recently spoke about XBRL, standards and sustainability at a PwC event.
The World Economic Forum’s International Business Council (IBC) has added its weight behind the growing momentum for sustainability standards.
This week IFRS Foundation Trustee Teresa Ko underlined why she thinks that the IFRS’ history of good governance and transparency makes it an ideal base for a new Sustainability Standards Board.
A recent paper from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) demonstrates the importance of choosing the right data for producing company ratings.
As repeat readers of this newsletter will know, sustainability reporting has long been troubled by a confusing proliferation of competing and complementary standards and frameworks that reduce usability and comparability.