On 31 July, the European Commission adopted the final texts of the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). After several draft texts, this reveals the binding reporting requirements for all companies covered by the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). As soon as the texts appear in the Official Journal of the European Union, they will enter into force. The final standards do not come a day too soon, as the first group of CSRD-compliant companies will have to become compliant as of financial year 2024.
The die is cast: the European Commission has published its final reporting standards – the ESRS – as a series of ‘delegated acts’. The ESRS stipulates exactly how companies should report on their sustainability strategy, policy and performance; something required by the CSRD, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive.
Since the release of the first version by the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) in November 2022, it has been subjected to several rounds of feedback and thorough consultation within the European Commission, Parliament and Council, leading to numerous adjustments to the text. Katelijne Norga, founder and climate solutionist at Pantarein, provides an interpretation of the latest adjustments to the reporting standards:
“The good news is the importance given to E1, the climate standard. That standard describes what data and information a company must publish about its climate impacts and policies, such as energy consumption and energy mix, scope 1, 2 and 3 greenhouse gas emissions, etc. Companies are also required to prepare a climate transition plan: an action plan to be climate neutral by 2050, with an intermediate target for 2030. In addition, they must also examine and document the ways in which they themselves are subject to climate change and the financial impact this may have.”
“The Commission indirectly obliges companies to always include this standard intheir reporting, which is a good thing, as the success of the Green Deal depends on the intensity with which companies address their climate impacts. Those who still want to omit the topic must explicitly demonstrate that climate change is non-material for their business. However, customers, banks and other stakeholders will look very critically at companies that indicate they have no climate impact at all or vice versa.”
“Here at Pantarein, we are also convinced that a mature sustainability strategy can only exist if a company respects planetary boundaries. And of course, when it comes to the climate crisis, there is not a second to lose. We have therefore been including topics such as climate mitigation, climate adaptation and carbon footprint as a foundation for our projects for many years,” Norga adds.
The timing of the commitments has, however, changed somewhat. “The rollout of the CSRD and ESRS is moving fast. While this is understandable, it not easy for companies to adjust their policies and processes at the same pace. Especially when it comes to the data to be requested along the supply chain – from suppliers – and various social issues. There has been a fair amount of concern in the business community relating to this.”
“Therefore, the Commission has allowed phasing for some reporting requirements. Depending on the type of company and the data type in question, up to 3 years of deferred reporting can be granted. This phasing gives companies more time to prepare, and also spread the costs associated with implementing their data monitoring.”
“Hence, the phasing provisions mainly apply to companies with less than 750 employees. Reporting costs are relatively higher for them than for the largest companies. An additional driver for this phasing is that Europe wants to make sustainability reports as qualitative as possible, with a view to maximizing relevance for the stakeholders who will consult the reports.”
The principle of double materiality remains unaffected. Europe thus wants to continue to distinguish itself through companies’ choice of whether to disclose in their reports the impacts on people and the environment, as well as the effects that external trends such as climate change can have on a company’s financial value. International frameworks such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) do not take that double perspective.
“Companies are expected to use a robust materiality assessment to uncover the impacts, risks and opportunities for their specific context. That materiality lays the foundation for the company’s future strategy and also for reporting. All material topics must be part of the strategy outlined by a company itself in order to survive in the climate-neutral economy of the future. And for all material topics, the ESRSs stipulate a whole series of data points that must be included in your report.”
“Topics that emerge from the materiality study as non-material may be omitted by companies. With the exception of the climate standard, that is; the Commission is still holding back on that.”
“One regret is that a whole range of previously mandatory disclosure requirements have now become voluntary under the influence of industrial lobbyists. These are data items that were deemed too challenging or expensive. A regrettable example is the biodiversity transition plan. Even if the materiality study shows that biodiversity is a material issue for a company, it is not under any obligation to prepare a biodiversity transition plan. Knowing that biodiversity, including vital ecosystem services, is being degraded all over the world, it is incomprehensible that Europe has allowed itself to backtrack to such an extent on this topic.”
Among the mandatory indicators that large companies must report are also data points that financial players must publish under, for example, their own reporting obligations, such as the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR), the Benchmark Regulation (BMR) or the ‘pillar 3’ disclosure requirements of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR). “What’s new is that these indicators must be listed in a separate table in your report,” Norga continues. “For each data item, you indicate where in the report its non-materiality is proven and mentioned. Simple omission of the indicator is not allowed. Besides, when such an indicator is reported as non-material, financial advisers may assume that it does not affect the financial position of the company.”
“Finally, the Commission introduces some safeguards specific to SMEs,” Norga adds.“ There will be a legal cap on the information large companies can request from SMEs in their value chain. This will prevent disproportionate amounts of work from reaching them. However, this does not alter the fact that smaller companies will have to provide sustainability information and data. To guide them in this, EFRAG is developing voluntary guidance for unlisted SMEs in the coming period. Proportional mandatory standards will be developed for listed SMEs, as they will have to report from fiscal year 2026, although they will be given the option to wait until fiscal year 2028. Their standards will be proportional and thus less demanding.”
The value of the CSRD and ESRS as tools to make companies and our economy increasingly sustainable remains high. Katelijne Norga attributes this largely to double materiality and the integral view as key drivers in particular. “The principle of double materiality was newly introduced by Europe in the context of the reporting obligation. Actually, it approaches sustainability in a natural way: you include both risks FOR your company and risks BY your company. This double approach, outside-in as well as inside-out, is in fact logical, but had not been mandated until now.”
“Another merit of the CSRD is that it requires reporting on all three ESG pillars and across the entire value chain. Organizations are forced to be honest about their environmental and human impact, not only in their own production and processes, but across the entire supply chain. In this way, Europe bridges the gap with the duty of care, which it is currently translating into legislation under the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. At the same time, it means that non-CSRD-liable companies also have to go along with the sustainability principles. They are part of the supply chain of large and listed companies, and therefore need to take steps themselves to maintain their business relationships. All of this will lead to an economy that will become more sustainable as a whole, just as the Green Deal aspires to.”
Meanwhile, the content of the legal texts is being finalized. However, there are still some symbolic hurdles to overcome before the legislative process is completed. These include the compulsory scrutiny period at European level, which lasts two months, possibly extended by another two months. After this period has passed, the text will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. This should be by December 2023 at the very latest.
Inclusion in the Official Journal is when the ESRS officially come into force. From then on, things move fast. From 1 January 2024, the first group of companies must organize themselves according to the CSRD and ESRS, in order to issue their first compliant report in 2025. This is the timeline that companies should respect:
For fiscal year…
The latter group of companies must report on ESG impacts at a group level. Separate standards will be issued for this purpose.
Ready, set, go? Now that the delegated acts have been published, the content of the ESRS is unwavering. In other words, there’s no time to waste! Need support? Then be sure to contact our sustainability experts on mail@pantarein.be.