Handbook
Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

The compilation of this handbook was led by an informal Technical Working Group comprising EBRD, EIB,International Finance Corporation (IFC), KfW, NIB and the World Bank.
Special thanks are extended to this Technical Working Group, for their detailed work, that drove the preparation ofthis document as well as to the 4 Multilateral Development Banks (AfDB, EIB, IFC and World Bank) that publishedthe first Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting in March 2015, and the 11 International Financial
Institutions (IFIs) that published the updated version in December 2015. The material also benefited fromgenerous input from members of the Impact Reporting Working Group, coordinated by EBRD and KfW,
with support from ICMA.
The 11 International Financial Institutions (IFIs) that published “Working Towards a Harmonized Framework for
Impact Reporting” in December 2015 are:

The GBP Impact Reporting Working Group currently consists of the following organisations:
Working Group Coordinators:
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)
KfW
KommunalBanken (KBN)
Working Group Members:
ActiamAmundiAnglian Water
Ashurst Hong Kong office
Axa IM
Bank of America
BlackRockBNP Paribas
Carbon 4
Ceres
CICERO Shades of Green
Climate Bonds Initiative
EDF
European Investment Bank (EIB)I Care & Consult
ICE Data Services
Impact Investment Exchange (IIX)ING
Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS)International Finance Corporation (IFC)
London Stock Exchange

Luxembourg Stock Exchange
Mainstreet Investment Partners
MirovaMizuho International plc
Moody’sMorgan Stanley
NatixisNordeaOP Corporate Bank
Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (SEB)
Social Value InstituteSociete Generale
South PoleWhite & Case
World BankWWF
Yale Initiative on Sustainable Finance
Zurich Insurance

Disclaimer
The information in this document has been provided by third-party sources and is intended for general information only (the “Information”),
and is not intended to be and should not be relied upon as being legal, financial, investment, tax, regulatory, business or other professional
advice. ICMA and the Green Bond Principles are not responsible for the accuracy, reliability, currency or completeness of the Information.
ICMA and the Green Bond Principles do not represent nor warrant that the Information is accurate, suitable or complete and neither ICMA,
its employees or representatives, nor the Green Bond Principles or its members shall have any liability arising from, or relating to its use.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 20202

Contents
I.
II.
III.
IV.

Introduction
Background History
Core Principles and Recommendations for Reporting
Sector Specific Guidance and Reporting Metrics
1. Renewable Energy
Core Indicators
Other Indicators (Examples)
2. Energy Efficiency
Core Indicators
Other Indicators (Examples)
3. Sustainable Water and Wastewater Management
Core Indicators
Other Sustainability Indicators
4. Waste Management and Resource Efficiency
Guidance and Definitions
Core Indicators
Other Sustainability Indicators
5. Clean Transportation
Guidance and Definitions
Core Indicators
Other Sustainability Indicators
6. Green Buildings
Guidance and Definitions
Core Indicators
Other Sustainability Indicators
7. Biodiversity
Core Indicators
Other Sustainability Indicators
Guidance and Definitions for Additional Human Rights and Social Disclosures
8. Climate change adaptation
Exemplary Indicators
Other Sustainability Indicators
Appendix

V.

4
5
7
10
10
10
10
11
11
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
29
30
31
33
34
35

Reporting Templates

36

Renewable Energy
Energy Efficiency
Sustainable Water and Wastewater Management
Sustainable Water and Wastewater Management (continued)
Waste Management and Resource-Efficiency
Waste Management and Resource-Efficiency (continued)
Clean Transportation
Clean Transportation (continued)
Green Buildings
Biodiversity
Biodiversity (continued)
Climate Change Adaptation
Climate Change Adaptation (continued)
Climate Change Adaptation (continued)
Climate Change Adaptation (continued)
Notes

36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

3

I.

Introduction

The overall goal of the green bond market is to promote and amplify the important role that financial
markets can play in helping to address environmental issues. By explicitly specifying the environmentally
beneficial projects to which the bond proceeds are allocated, Green Bonds allow investors to assess and allocate
capital to environmentally sustainable investments. It is assumed that the green bonds referred to in this document
are aligned with the Green Bond Principles (“GBP”)1. The GBP help enhance the integrity and transparency ofenvironmental finance, including through recommending impact reporting.
In March 2015, a working group of four Multilateral Development Banks (AfDB, EIB, IFC and World Bank)
developed and published the first Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting, that was later revised
and republished by 11 International Financial Institutions (IFIs).2 The framework outlined core principles andrecommendations for impact reporting in order to provide issuers with reference and guidance for the developmentof their own reporting and provided core indicators and reporting templates for Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy Projects.
Successively, harmonized frameworks for impact reporting on further categories of eligibility for Green Projects
under the GBP have been released. Sectors so far covered are: Sustainable Water and Wastewater Management
Projects (June 2017), Sustainable Waste Management and Resource-Efficiency Projects (February 2018), Clean
Transportation Projects (June 2018) and Green Building Projects (February 2019). These harmonized frameworks
summarise the conclusions of informal technical working groups3, which have received broader input through the
Impact Reporting Working Group convened by the GBP Executive Committee.
This handbook unites the above mentioned harmonized frameworks in one document preserving thecontent of the initial documents. The objective is to enhance the usability of the initial documents and to
avoid repetitions.
The GBP recommend the use of both qualitative performance indicators and, where feasible, quantitative
performance measures with the disclosure of the key underlying methodology and/or assumptions used in thequantitative determination. This handbook outlines general core principles and recommendations for reportingin order to provide issuers with a reference as they develop their own reporting. This handbook also offers impact
reporting metrics and sector specific guidance for the aforementioned project categories. In chapter V of thishandbook, reporting templates are included for issuers to use and adapt to their own circumstances. These
templates make reference to the most commonly used indicators. Other indicators, however, might be relevant
as well.
All recommendations, indicators and templates need to be compatible with different approaches to the managementof proceeds, which can be based on allocations to either individual projects or project portfolios.
This document does not, at this stage, cover impact reporting on projects pursuant to the remaining GBP
categories. However, the authors of this document acknowledge the importance of harmonized metrics
also for such projects, for which additional suitable indicators are to be developed in the future and added
to this handbook.
It is acknowledged that there are also other initiatives in the market that provide guidance on impact reporting
including by green bond market participants.4

1
2

3
4

See: https://www.icmagroup.org/green-social-and-sustainability-bonds
Participants: African Development Bank (AfDB), Agence Française de Développement (AFD), Asian Development Bank (ADB), European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), European Investment Bank (EIB), Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development (IBRD), International Finance Corporation (IFC), Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW), Nederlandse Financierings-Maatschappij voor
Ontwikkelingslanden (FMO), and Nordic Investment Bank (NIB).
The members of the respective working groups are mentioned under II. Background History
For example: Nordic Public Sector Issuers’ “Position Paper on Green Bonds Impact Reporting” https://www.kuntarahoitus.fi/app/uploads/
sites/2/2020/02/NPSI_Position_paper_2020_final.pdf

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 20204

II. Background History• In November 2013, a group of investors, issuers and market intermediaries gathered at a Symposium hosted
by the World Bank5 to discuss the green bond market and what is needed to help it achieve its purpose.
Investors recognized a need for more transparency around the use of proceeds as well as further developmentin the area of impact reporting, and encouraged participating MDBs to help develop guidance on a common
approach, building on ongoing work among a broader group of IFIs to develop harmonized approaches for
GHG accounting.
• In January 2014, the Green Bond Principles (GBP), a voluntary set of guidelines, were published at the initiativeof capital market intermediaries that recommended transparency and disclosure to promote integrity in thedevelopment of the green bond market by clarifying the cornerstones of green bond issuance.
• In February 2015, a statement of investor expectations for the green bond market convened by Ceres for theInvestor Network on Climate Risk, highlighted investors’ requests for issuers to report on the environmental
impact issuers expected their projects to generate.
• In March 2015, a second edition of the Green Bond Principles was published with the support of the International
Capital Market Association (ICMA) as the Secretariat to the GBP. This edition benefited from extensive dialogue
with representative groups of issuers, investors and intermediaries to reflect the evolution of the green bondmarket and to identify best practice. The updated GBP identified four components of green bonds: (1) use
of proceeds (eligibility criteria); (2) process for project evaluation and selection (due diligence procedures); (3)management of proceeds (allocation procedures); and (4) reporting. With regard to reporting, the updated GBP
specify that:“In addition to reporting on the use of proceeds and the temporary investment of unallocated proceeds, issuers
should provide at least annually a list of projects to which green bond proceeds have been allocated including- when possible with regards to confidentiality and/or competitive considerations - a brief description of the
projects and the amounts disbursed, as well as the expected environmentally sustainable impact. [...]The GBP acknowledge that there are currently no established standards for impact reporting on Green
Projects, and welcome and encourage initiatives, including those by leading green bond issuers, that
help establish a model for impact reporting that others can adopt and/or adapt to their needs.”• In March 2015, based on investor interest in impact reporting and the positive influence that higher transparency
and comparability in this area may have for the green bond market and the call by investors such as Blackrock
and Zurich Insurance for shared impact assessment approaches, AfDB, EIB, IFC, and the World Bank came
together as a working group convened by the World Bank Treasury to develop a Harmonized Framework for
Impact Reporting. The first version of this document was discussed with and distributed to investors and othermarket participants for broader consideration and published.
• In May 2015, ICMA, as GBP Secretariat, distributed the document to the GBP Members and Observers, tobroaden its reach and increase its potential use by more market participants.
• In September 2015, seven additional IFIs joined the working group and their comments are reflected in therevised version of the document that was published in December 2015 under an initiative coordinated by the
EIB timed to coincide with COP 21, hosted in Paris.
• In August 2016, the GBP Executive Committee established the Impact Reporting Working Group (“IRWG”). It
was agreed that the IRWG would be co-chaired by Blackrock and EBRD.
• In September 2016, the kick-off meeting of the IRWG agreed to broaden sectoral coverage beyond renewables
and energy efficiency, which were already covered by the aforementioned document, incrementally tacklingother GBP project categories.
• In June 2017, the 30 members of the IRWG, led by an informal technical working group comprising EBRD,
KfW, NIB and the World Bank, published Suggested Impact Reporting Metrics for Sustainable Water andWastewater Projects. Building on and referencing the previous framework of the Harmonized Framework for
Impact Reporting, the document proposed core metrics for reporting on sustainable water and wastewaterprojects, while highlighting the importance of key qualitative and contextual information, proposing benchmarks
and baselines, and offering additional sustainability indicators that may enhance reporting. Illustrative templates,
similar to those proposed under the earlier document were provided both for project-by-project reporting andfor portfolio-based reporting.
5

See: http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/980521525116735167/Green-Bond-Symposium-Summary.pdf

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 20205• In February 2018, the 36 members of the IRWG still led by an informal technical working group comprising
EBRD, KfW, NIB and the World Bank and co-chaired by Blackrock and EBRD published Suggested Impact
Reporting Metrics for Waste Management and Resource Efficiency Projects. It followed exactly the sameformat as the June 2017 document.
• In June 2018, 37 members of the IRWG led by an expanded informal technical working group that included
EIB, published Suggested Impact Reporting Metrics for Clean Transportation Projects.
• In March 2019, under the co-chairmanship of EBRD and KfW, 45 members of the IRWG led by the informal
technical working group of EBRD, KfW, NIB and the World Bank, published Suggested Impact Reporting
Metrics for Green Building Projects.
• In April 2020, under the co-chairmanship of EBRD and KfW, 43 members of the IRWG led by the informal
technical working group of EBRD, KfW, NIB and the World Bank published “Suggested Impact Reporting
Metrics for Biodiversity Projects”.
• In December 2020, under the co-chairmanship of EBRD and KfW, 39 members of the IRWG led by the informal
technical working group of EBRD, KfW, NIB and the World Bank published “Suggested Impact Reporting
Metrics for Climate change adaptation Projects”.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 20206

III. Core Principles and Recommendations
for Reporting
1.

Green bond issuers are encouraged to report on both the use of green bond proceeds, as well as the
expected environmental impacts at least on an annual basis.

2.

Issuers are recommended to define and disclose the period and process for including projects in theirreport. There are several options for choosing when to add/remove projects to/from the report. Some ofthese options are described below. Projects can be added/removed to/from an impact report either directly,
or indirectly via adding/removing them to/from a portfolio when reporting on a portfolio level.
•

Projects can be added to the report once the issuer has approved and determined a project as eligible,
or once green bond proceeds have been allocated to eligible disbursements.

•

Projects can be removed from a report when no allocations to eligible disbursements have taken placein the reporting period, or after the underlying loans have been repaid.

As part of its due diligence in monitoring projects included in its green bond program, an issuer may elect toremove a project from its green bond program, in which case it could cease reporting on such a project until
a subsequent decision to restore the project’s eligibility.6
3.

It is recommended that the report indicates the total signed amount7 and the amount of green bondproceeds allocated to eligible disbursements8. It would also be beneficial for issuers to show additional
information such as year of signing (or other measures to describe the seasoning of a portfolio) or projectstage from a financing point of view (such as signed, disbursed, repaying).

4.

A defining characteristic of green bonds is that the issuance proceeds (or an amount equal to the proceeds)
are to be allocated only to those projects that meet the issuer’s predefined eligibility criteria. Issuers areencouraged to put in place a formal internal process for the allocation of proceeds linked to theirlending and investment operations for Green Projects and to report on the allocation of proceeds.
Issuers are encouraged to explain the key characteristics of the approach they select for their allocations andto provide reference to external audit/verification, when applicable, regarding their allocation criteria.

5.

Depending on the process put in place for the allocation of proceeds, it is recommended that issuers
either provide a list of projects to which green bond proceeds have been allocated, or report solely ona portfolio level. The latter might be necessary if confidentiality considerations restrict the detail that can bedisclosed, or useful if a large number of small-sized projects is financed by a green bond (e.g. green bonds
financing a loan programme). Issuers are encouraged to explain the key characteristics of the approach they
select for their report.

6.

Depending on the way in which proceeds are allocated, there can be differences in the approach to
impact reporting.
If allocations are to individual projects, it is recommended that the report:

6
7
8

•

Identifies the specific projects and clearly defines, for each project, the total project results (including
financing from all financiers) with information about the total project size and/or the issuer’s share of total
financing (project-by-project report); and/or•

Aggregates project-by-project results including only the pro-rated share (as a percentage of the issuer’s
share of the total financing) of the total projects’ results (portfolio report based on project-by-project
allocations).

Possible reasons for removing a project from a green bond program include, but are not limited to, cancellation of the project, or restructuring that results inthe project no longer meeting the eligibility criteria. Issuers are encouraged to disclose their approach to removing projects from their green bond programs,
if applicable.
Total approved and legally committed amount of financing for a project or the components thereof eligible under a green bond program. Where only aportion of the overall financing is eligible, only the eligible portion should be reported. For example, if the total approved project size is CCY 10 million, of
which CCY 6 million is eligible under the green bond program, the signed amount reported would be CCY 6 million.
For projects with partial eligibility (see par. 14), the issuer should disclose the procedure for attributing disbursements to the eligible components.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 20207

If allocations are to a portfolio of projects, issuers typically report on the overall results of the portfolio(portfolio report based on portfolio allocations). Issuers are however encouraged to also report the prorated share of the overall results.
7.

The impact report should illustrate the expected environmental impact made possible as a result of
projects to which green bond proceeds have been allocated. It should be based on ex-ante estimates(developed prior to project implementation) of expected annual results for a representative year once a projectis completed and operating at normal capacity. In case of reporting on a portfolio level, ex-ante estimates canbe based on the annual analyses per portfolio and, if several categories are financed, per category, if possible.
The method of estimating the impacts should be made transparent. As the report would include the estimatedresults of projects that are still in the construction or implementation phase, there is no guarantee that theseresults will ultimately materialize. The reporting is thus not intended to provide actual results achieved in a
specific year or reporting period.

8.

It could also be beneficial to report the estimated lifetime results and/or project economic life (in years)
to provide users with a basis for understanding the impact of the project over its lifetime. A simple
multiplication of the project economic life by the estimated annual impact may not always provide a good
estimate of the lifetime impact results, because this would not take into account ramp-up and ramp-downphases of the project life cycle. Also, in some project types, it may be difficult to aggregate all the measures
being implemented at a project site given the heterogeneous nature of processes and/or equipment.

9.

In case the issuer samples ex-post verification of specific projects, it is recommended that the relevant
results are included in the reporting. An important consideration in estimating impact indicators is that they
are often based on a number of assumptions. While technical experts aim to make sound and conservative
assumptions that are reasonable based on the information available at the time, the actual environmental
impact of the projects may diverge from initial projections. For example, social, economic, technical, politicaland legal changes can cause deviations from projections. In any case, transparency on the assumptions
would clarify the reasons behind divergences between ex-ante and ex-post assessments.

10. To facilitate comparison of project results, it is suggested that issuers aim to report on at least alimited number of sector specific core indicators for projects included in their green bond programs.
This document proposes sector specific core indicators for several of the GBP project categories in chapter
IV of the handbook. However, other indicators might be deemed relevant as well.
11. For the calculation of indicators, where there is no single commonly-used standard, issuers may follow
their own methodologies while making these available to investors. For the calculation of greenhouse gas(“GHG”) emissions reduced/avoided, for instance, there are a number of calculation methodologies bothwithin and across institutions. While there are on-going efforts to harmonize GHG accounting methodologies
for relevant sectors among a broad group of IFIs, given the current differences in calculation approaches,
reporting GHG emission data based on a uniform, consistent and published methodology remains a challenge.
Issuers are encouraged to provide full transparency on the applicable GHG accounting methodology
and assumptions, which can be referenced.
12. Investors should be aware that comparing projects, sectors, or whole portfolios is difficult because
general assumptions on inputs in calculations, like grid factors and calculation methods, also varysignificantly. In addition, the cost structures between countries also vary, so that developing costefficiency calculations (results per unit of amount invested in eligible projects) could place smaller countries
with limited economies of scale at a disadvantage and will not take into consideration country-specific context.
13. Issuers may elect, for consistency reasons, to convert units reported for individual projects. Thisshould be based on a standard conversion factor to facilitate comparison and aggregation for example
converting tons of coal equivalent (“TCE”) to megawatt hours (“MWh”), with appropriate disclosure of theconversion approach. However, complex recalculations that are not publically disclosed in project
documentation, such as re-estimating GHG emissions based on consistent baseline assumptions, should
be avoided.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 20208

14. Issuers are encouraged to be transparent about projects with partial eligibility. Some projects may havecomponents that meet the issuer’s green bond eligibility criteria and other components that do not. Issuers
should disclose whether and to what extent they accept partial eligibility. Should an issuer use criteria that
require allocating green bond proceeds to a project with partial eligibility, then it is recommended to explain all
assumptions about which component each disbursement relates to (e.g. if it is assumed that disbursements
are first made to the ‘green’ component, or pro-rated between the ‘green’ and ‘other’ components). In
addition, issuers may also report the portion of the total project that is green bond eligible.
15. In case the expected impacts of different project components (such as for example energy efficiency(“EE”) and renewable energy (“RE”) components of the same project) may not be reported separately,issuers may attribute the results to each component based on their relative share in the related
financing, disclosing the attribution approach. Alternatively, issuers could combine the reporting
metrics for both sectors into a single table (option 2 in the reference reporting templates).
16. Issuers should be transparent on how they report all green bond-related cash-flows in one currency
when they allocate green bond proceeds and report on the projects to which green bond proceeds
have been allocated.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

9

IV. Sector Specific Guidance and Reporting Metrics
1. Renewable Energy
The following section suggests core indicators for renewable energy projects. However, there may be projects forwhich the proposed core indicators are either not applicable or the data is not available. In such cases, issuers
are encouraged to use metrics appropriate for these projects. Users of the reports should recognize that whileissuers will make efforts to improve the consistency and availability of reported metrics over time, projects withclimate impacts can cover a wide diversity of sectors and sub-sectors making complete harmonization of reporting
metrics challenging. All the same, the reports will provide a convenient summary of the projects and the scope of
their impacts that are considered of particular interest to green bond investors.

Core Indicators#1) Annual GHG emissions reduced/avoided in tonnes of CO2 equivalent /a#2) Annual renewable energy generation in MWh/GWh (electricity) and GJ/TJ (other energy)#3) Capacity of renewable energy plant(s) constructed or rehabilitated in MW

Other Indicators (Examples)• Capacity of renewable energy plant(s) to be served by transmission systems (MW)• Annual Absolute (gross) GHG emissions from the project in tonnes of CO2 equivalent /a /b
Notes:
a. Where CO2 emissions figures are reported, the GHG accounting methodology and assumptions should be referenced.
b. Depending on their own GHG reporting requirements, some institutions may report Absolute (gross) GHG emissions from the project,alongside the reduced/avoided emissions (under indicator #1). Together with baseline emissions, Absolute (gross) emissions allow for
the calculation of emissions reduced/avoided.

In the context of climate change, data on emissions of GHG (often quoted in tonnes of CO2 equivalent) is acommonly used indicator to assess the climate impact of certain types of projects. However, there exist a numberof different methodologies for estimating and reporting GHG emissions. The differences mainly relate to theassumptions used for estimating the future output (e.g. plant efficiency), the emission conversion factors (e.g.
project specific combined margin vs UNFCCC standardized baseline for the host country/region), definitions forthe boundaries of a specific project (e.g. physical infrastructure/system boundary vs geographic/ administrative
boundary), scope of the GHG emission reductions attributable to the project, and the baseline alternative used forcomparison with the project. While many organizations have existing, published methodologies for project GHG
accounting, there are on-going efforts to harmonize GHG accounting methodologies for relevant sectors among a
broad group of International Financial Institutions (IFIs).9 However, this is an on-going process and, in the absenceof one single standard, institutions may follow their own methodologies while striving to make them publicallyavailable and transparent. Green bond impact reporting will increase market-wide transparency on the status quo.

9

An overarching harmonized framework has already been agreed.
See http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/IFI_Framework_for_Harmonized_Approach%20to_Greenhouse_Gas_
Accounting.pdf

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202010

2. Energy Efficiency
The following section suggests core indicators for energy efficiency projects. However, there may be projects forwhich the proposed core indicators are either not applicable or the data is not available. In such cases, issuers
are encouraged to use metrics appropriate for these projects. Users of the reports should recognize that whileissuers will make efforts to improve the consistency and availability of reported metrics over time, projects withclimate impacts can cover a wide diversity of sectors and sub-sectors making complete harmonization of reporting
metrics challenging. All the same, the reports will provide a convenient summary of the projects and the scope of
their impacts that are considered of particular interest to green bond investors.

Core Indicators#1) Annual energy savings in MWh/GWh (electricity) and GJ/TJ (other energy savings) /a#2) Annual GHG emissions reduced/avoided in tonnes of CO2 equivalent /b

Other Indicators (Examples)• Number of people benefited• Annual Absolute (gross) GHG emissions from the project in tonnes of CO2 equivalent /b /c
Notes:
a. Energy savings depend on benchmarks
b. Where CO2 emissions figures are reported, the GHG accounting methodology and assumptions should be referenced.
c. Depending on their own GHG reporting requirements, some institutions may report Absolute (gross) GHG emissions from the project,alongside the reduced/avoided emissions (under indicator #2). Together with baseline emissions, Absolute (gross) emissions allow for
the calculation of emissions reduced/avoided.

In the context of climate change, data on emissions of GHG (often quoted in tonnes of CO2 equivalent) is acommonly used indicator to assess the climate impact of certain types of projects. However, there exist a numberof different methodologies for estimating and reporting GHG emissions. The differences mainly relate to theassumptions used for estimating the future output (e.g. plant efficiency), the emission conversion factors (e.g.
project specific combined margin vs UNFCCC standardized baseline for the host country/region), definitions forthe boundaries of a specific project (e.g. physical infrastructure/system boundary vs geographic/ administrative
boundary), scope of the GHG emission reductions attributable to the project, and the baseline alternative used forcomparison with the project. While many organizations have existing, published methodologies for project GHG
accounting, there are on-going efforts to harmonize GHG accounting methodologies for relevant sectors among a
broad group of International Financial Institutions (IFIs).10 However, this is an on-going process and, in the absenceof one single standard, institutions may follow their own methodologies while striving to make them publicallyavailable and transparent. Green bond impact reporting will increase market-wide transparency on the status quo.

10 An overarching harmonized framework has already been agreed. See http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/IFI_Framework_
for_Harmonized_Approach%20to_Greenhouse_Gas Accounting.pdf

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202011

3. Sustainable Water and Wastewater Management
The indicators proposed herein aim to capture and illustrate the environmental and sustainability benefits of projects
relating to sustainable water and wastewater management, which are recognised by the GBP for Green Projects
under one of the ten broad categories of eligibility for Green Projects:“sustainable water and wastewater management (including sustainable infrastructure for clean and/or
drinking water, wastewater treatment sustainable urban drainage systems and river training and otherforms of flooding mitigation)”.
Relevant projects may also reference categories focused on pollution prevention and control, environmentally
sustainable management of living natural resources and land use, as well as climate change adaptation which thisdocument does not yet cover at this stage. However, the authors of this document acknowledge the importanceof harmonisation also for such projects.
The proposed indicators are designed to facilitate quantitative reporting at a project and/or at a portfolio levelacross geographies. The importance of the geographic context in the assessment of solutions reinforces thebenefit of providing additional contextual information. We therefore encourage disclosure on the local and regional
context, including river basin or regional sea specific baselines, to help understand the environmental impacts/
benefits of the project in its context. Additional qualitative reporting is also encouraged.
It is recognised that water use, wastewater treatment and energy consumption are often closely interlinked, andtherefore where such projects result in energy savings, these, and related Greenhouse Gas reductions, can bereported using the core indicators for Energy Efficiency and corresponding reporting timetables.
For meaningful aggregation of indicators across projects, consistency in the methods of calculation, baselines andbenchmarks would be required. Thus for the purpose of data quality, issuers are encouraged to disclose additional
technical reports and/or data verification protocols where additional information could be provided as well as links
to the sources of such data and methods of calculation.11

11 For example, the International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation Utilities (IBNET) is the world largest database for water and sanitation utilities
performance data. https://www.ib-net.org/ or guidance on definitions and data sources for water-related metrics that are commonly used by companies todisclose aggregated data at site or company level, such as the Global Reporting Initiatives G4 standard water metrics.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

12

Core Indicators
A. Sustainable Water Management - Water Use Sustainability and Efficiency Projects#1) Annual water savings
Annual water savings for example from:– reduction in water losses in water transfer and/or distribution– reduction in water consumption of economic activities (e.g. industrial processes, agricultural activities
including irrigation, buildings, etc.)12– water re-use and/or water use avoided by waterless solutions and equipment, (e.g. for sanitation, coolingsystems for power plants, industrial processes, etc.)
Indicators:• Annual absolute (gross) water use before and after the project in m3/a, reduction in water use in %Benchmarks:– Internationally recognised benchmark standards for water use efficiency (e.g. EU Directives and Best
Available Techniques reference standards or industry/sector good/best practice standards)– The Water Exploitation Index Plus (WEI+) or internationally recognised tools such as WRI’s Aqueduct, and
the WWF’s Water Risk Filter– The average monthly water consumption as a percentage of the sustainable basin water
B. Wastewater Treatment Projects (including Sewage Sludge Management)#2) Annual volume of wastewater treated or avoided13
Annual amount of:– wastewater treated to appropriate standards or raw/untreated wastewater discharges avoided– wastewater avoided, reused or minimised at source
Indicators:• Annual absolute (gross) amount of wastewater treated, reused or avoided before and after the project in m3/a
and p.e./a and as %Population equivalent (1 p.e.) or 60 g of BOD5 (EU definition)#3) Treatment and disposal and/or reuse of sewage sludge
Treatment, disposal and/or reuse of sewage sludge (according to country legislation compatible with internationallyrecognised standards):– Sludge that is treated and disposed of (e.g. dewatering, sanitisation, composting, digestion withoutbiogas extraction)– Sludge that is reused (e.g. digestion with biogas recovery, phosphorous recovery, agriculture use, cocombustion)
Indicators:• Annual absolute (gross) amount of raw/untreated sewage sludge that is treated and disposed of (in tonnes ofdry solids p.a. and in %)• Annual absolute (gross) amount of sludge that is reused (in tonnes of dry solids p.a. and in %)Note: Projects which involve sludge that is dumped in landfill or stored in the waste water treatment plant (WWTP) premises or sludge
that is recycled without approved safeguards will be excluded. In portfolio reporting, this may be combined with utilisation, recycling and/or disposal of other types of (solid) waste for one aggregated figure.
12 Improvements in sustainable water management may also come via small interventions (e.g. distributed sustainable water assets include composting toilets,
low-flow water fixtures, efficient washing machines, micro-irrigation systems and rainwater tanks).
13 Water and wastewater projects may be deemed to have multiple benefits which can be broken out or reported according to the most meaningful impact. For
instance, a project may be reported solely as a reduction in Water Consumption (under A.#1 of the respective templates under V. Reporting Templates), or
by differentiating between the water use avoided and the generation of wastewater avoided.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202013

Benchmarks:– Internationally recognised benchmark standards for wastewater/effluent quality at discharge andtreatment efficiency (e.g. EU Directive, HELCOM recommendations or national standards)– Total discharges in m3 or p.e. (if known) or concentrations of pollutants (BOD5 and/or Ntot and/or Ptot) in
the recipient surface water body (a river basin, a lake or a regional sea)
– Water quality indices, such as UN Global Water Quality Index (WQI), could be used to characterise thebaseline environmental conditions of the recipient surface water body

Other Sustainability Indicators#1) Improved water supply infrastructure and facilities and/or improved quality of the supplied drinking
water as a result of the project
Indicators:• Number of people with access to clean drinking water (or annual volume of clean drinking water in m3/a
supplied for human consumption) through infrastructure supporting sustainable and efficient water use(where average consumption per person is consistent with internationally recognised standards forsustainable water use)
Benchmarks:– The definition of “clean drinking water” follows internationally recognised drinking water quality standards,
such as WHO or EU.
#2) Improved sanitation facilities that have been constructed under the project
The increase in the share of the population connected to wastewater collection and treatment systems helps indomestic water pollution abatement, and prevents long lasting environmental damage to the aquifers.
Indicators:• Number of people with access to improved sanitation facilities under the project
Benchmarks:– The definition of “improved sanitation facilities” follows the UNICEF-WHO Joint Monitoring Program
definition.
#3) Improved measures to reduce the risk from adverse flooding impact
This may include, for example, improved hydrometeorological forecasting, improved early warning systems,
infrastructure for flood mitigation (levees and reservoirs), flood zoning and improved basin planning.
Indicators:• Number of people and/or enterprises (e.g. companies or farms) benefitting from measures to mitigate theconsequences of floods and droughts#4) Sustainable land and water resources management (SLM) systems in place
SLM for the preservation and restoration of natural landscapes (such as floodplains, forests, watersheds, andwetlands) will be site-specific as different areas require different interventions. These may include land use regimes(e.g. watershed plans, soil and water conservation zones); agronomic and vegetative measures (e.g. intercropping,afforestation); water-efficient irrigation; structural measures (e.g. flood control and drainage measures, water
harvesting, run-off management, gully control measures); and/or active recharge by upstream activities to ensurea sustainable quantity of water. Land area may not be considered a pertinent indicator for localised actions thatare not significant at a watershed level.
Indicators:• Area covered by sustainable land and water resources management practices• Annual catchment of water (m3/year) that complies with quantity (m3/year) and quality (e.g. turbidity)
requirements by utilities.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

14

4. Waste Management and Resource Efficiency
The indicators proposed herein aim to capture and illustrate the environmental and sustainability benefits of projects
relating to waste management and resource-efficiency, which are recognised by the GBP for Green Projects under
one of the ten broad categories of eligibility for Green Projects:“pollution prevention and control (including…waste prevention, waste reduction, waste recycling andenergy/emission-efficient waste to energy…)”
This guidance builds on the previous work on Sustainable Water and Wastewater Projects, and thus theindicators proposed here focus only on supplementary waste management projects.14
Although relevant projects may also reference categories focused on “eco-efficient and/or circular economy
adapted products, production technologies and processes…”, this is a separate eligible category under the GBP,
which is expected to be covered more fully in the future.
While this document proposes certain quantitative impact reporting metrics, the GBP also encourages issuers toprovide qualitative information in relation to their waste management projects, whether they be focused on reducing
pollution by introducing or improving waste management systems or focused on improved use of resources. Suchqualitative information is also encouraged to provide for a meaningful contextualisation of the baseline situationand the improved solution as a result of the project. For waste management projects, this information may beespecially meaningful when it covers the entire management system, including characterisation of waste sources,
collection system (separate collection or not), waste recovery and re-use solutions (including which materials arebeing reused/recycled) and waste disposal, rather than isolated parts of it. In evaluating the environmental andsustainability benefits of waste management projects, it is especially useful for issuers to reference the broadly
acknowledged “waste hierarchy” in any qualitative reporting on their waste strategy. This seeks to prioritise those
activities that are optimal in managing resources and protecting the environment through extracting the greatest
benefit with the minimum of waste generated.
This waste hierarchy is typically presented in the following schematic form:

Most
Favored Option

Prevention
Minimization
Reuse
Recycling
Energy Recovery

Least
Favored Option

Disposal

As can be seen from this diagrammatic representation, waste prevention is the preferred option, followed
sequentially by minimisation, reuse, recycling, energy recovery and finally safe disposal. Descriptive examples foreach of these options are contained under Guidance and Definitions below.

14 This document therefore excludes wastewater projects, and, in alignment with the EU waste Framework Directive http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/
EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32006L0012&from=EN it also excludes gaseous effluents, radioactive waste, waste from waste resulting from prospecting,extraction, treatment and storage of mineral resources and the working of quarries, animal carcasses and natural, non-dangerous agricultural waste, as well
as decommissioned explosives.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

15

The proposed core and other sustainability indicators are designed to facilitate quantitative reporting at a project
and/or at a portfolio level across geographies. The importance of the geographic context in the assessment ofsolutions reinforces the benefit of providing additional contextual information. We therefore encourage disclosureon the national and regional context, including waste volume and waste management solution specific baselines,
to help understand the environmental impacts/benefits of the project in its context. Additional qualitative reportingis also encouraged.
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions are an important green benefit of waste management and resource
recovery interventions through avoidance of methane emissions from waste disposed of by preventing, minimising,reusing or recycling waste, production of energy from waste that substitutes for more emissions intensive
energy sources and mitigating GHG emissions from waste disposal sites. These projects (such as composting;waste reduction, recycling and reuse; landfill gas capture and collection; anaerobic digestion; waste to energy(thermal treatment) etc.) are motivated significantly by reducing GHG and there are approaches for estimatingthese emissions.
For meaningful aggregation of indicators across projects, consistency in the methods of calculation, baselines andbenchmarks would be required. Thus for the purpose of data quality, issuers are encouraged to disclose additional
technical reports and/or data verification protocols where additional information could be provided as well as links
to the sources of such data and methods of calculation.

Guidance and Definitions
Waste Management activities at each level of the Waste Management hierarchy may be describedas follows:
Waste Prevention:• Any operation that reduces at source the quantity of waste before recycling, composting, energy recovery
and landfilling become options.
Waste Minimisation:
Any operation that:• reduces the quantity of material used in the creation of products and increases the efficiency with which
products, once created, are used;• limits unnecessary consumption by designing and consuming products that generate less waste; and/or• checks, cleans or repairs products or components that have become waste in preparation for reuse without
any other pre-processing.
Waste Reuse:• Any operation that reuses products or components for the same purpose for which they were conceived.
Waste Recycling:• Any operation that recovers and reprocesses waste materials into materials or substances whether for thesame purpose for which they were conceived, or for other purposes.
Energy Recovery:• Any operation that converts non-recyclable waste materials into usable heat, electricity or fuel.
Waste Disposal:• Any operation which is not waste recovery.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

16

Core Indicators
A. Waste Management Projects – Resource Efficiency#1) Waste prevented, minimised, reused or recycled
Indicators:• Waste that is prevented, minimised, reused or recycled before and after the project in % of total waste and/or in absolute amount in tonnes p.a.
• For certain waste management projects that reduce the amount of waste disposed of, it may also be
possible to capture GHG emissions from waste management before and after the project in tCO2–e p.a.
Benchmarks:– Internationally recognised benchmark standards for waste management (e.g. EU Waste Policy and Waste
Framework Directive statistics and reports)– Internationally recognised tools for calculating Greenhouse Gases (GHG) in Solid Waste Management(SWM), such as the SWM-GHG Calculator (https://www.ifeu.de/en/project/tool-for-calculatinggreenhouse-gases-ghg-in-solid-waste-management-swm/) or EPA’s Waste Reduction Model(WARM, https://www.epa.gov/warm)
B. Energy Recovery from Waste Including Energy/Emission-Efficient Waste to Energy Projects#2) Energy recovered from waste
Annual amount of energy that is recovered from waste before and after the project in an environmentally soundmanner through specified methods:– Energy recovered (e.g. through landfill gas collection, anaerobic digestion plants, waste-to-energy
generation, biomass gasification, Mechanical Biological Treatment etc.)
Indicators:• Annual energy generation from non-recyclable waste in energy/emission-efficient waste to energy facilities
in MWh/GWh (electricity) and GJ/TJ (other energy)• Energy recovered from waste (minus any support fuel) in MWh/GWh/KJ of net energy generated p.a.15• GHG emissions from waste management before and after the project in tCO2–e p.a.
Benchmarks:– Internationally recognised tools for calculating Greenhouse Gases (GHG) in Solid Waste Management(SWM), such as the SWM-GHG Calculator (https://www.ifeu.de/en/project/tool-for-calculatinggreenhouse-gases-ghg-in-solid-waste-management-swm/) or EPA’s Waste Reduction Model(WARM, https://www.epa.gov/warm)– Internationally recognised standards for air emissions from waste to energy facilities (e.g. EU Directive on
Waste Incineration, EU Industrial Emissions Directive and Best Available Techniques reference document
for waste incineration)

15 Where supporting fuel is added in order to facilitate the combustion of waste, the energy from this fuel should be subtracted from the total energy generated.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202017

C. Pollution Control Projects#3) Waste collected and treated or disposed
Collection and treatment or disposal of waste (according to country legislation compatible with internationallyrecognised standards):– Waste that is separated and/or collected, and treated (including composted) or disposed of in anenvironmentally sound manner before and after the project. (This presumes no leakage of contaminants.)
Indicators:• Annual absolute (gross) amount of waste that is separated and/or collected, and treated (including
composted) or disposed of (in tonnes p.a. and in % of total waste)
Benchmarks:– Internationally recognised benchmark standards for waste separation and/or collection andenvironmentally sound waste disposal, such as EU Landfill Directive.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202018

Other Sustainability Indicators#1) Resource efficiency/reduction in raw materials used in manufacturing
Indicators:• KG of raw material per produced unit before and after• Added monetary value created using waste#2) Improved access to municipal waste collection (including separation)
The increase in the share of the population with access to waste collection helps in domestic waste
pollution abatement.
Indicators:• Number of people or % of population with access to waste collection under the project• Area with improved regular (daily, weekly or bi-weekly) waste collection service• How many fractions of waste were separated before and after the project• The absolute amount or % of residual non-separated waste before and after the project#3) Improved and regular access to street sweeping
Indicators:• Number of people or % of population with access to street sweeping under the project• Km of street with regular (daily, weekly or bi-weekly) street sweeping service coverage#4) Improved municipal waste treatment or disposal services
Indicators:• Number of people or % of population provided with improved municipal waste treatment or disposal services#5) Improved recycling programmes
Indicators:• Number of people benefitting from selective collection of recyclables• Number of informal recyclers integrated into a formal system#6) Reduced local pollution to air and/or water
Indicators:• Absolute or % reduction in local pollutants#7) Manufacturing for the circular economy
Indicators:• Tons of waste reduced• Products changed to increase waste reduction• Tons of secondary raw materials or compost produced

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202019

5. Clean Transportation
The indicators proposed herein aim to capture and illustrate the environmental and sustainability benefits of projects
relating to clean transportation, which are recognised by the GBP for Green Projects under one of the ten broad
categories of eligibility for Green Projects:“clean transportation (such as electric, hybrid, public, rail, non-motorised, multi-modal transportation,
infrastructure for clean energy vehicles and reduction of harmful emissions)”.
This guidance builds on the previous work on Sustainable Water and Wastewater Projects as well as Waste
Management and Resource-Efficiency Projects and thus the indicators proposed here focus only on additional
factors specific to clean transportation projects.16
This section does not cover impact reporting on projects focussed specifically on the design and manufacturingof clean vehicles and vehicle parts, which may be deemed to fall under another GBP category: “eco-efficient
products, production technologies and processes…”. The authors of this document acknowledge the importanceof developing harmonised indicators for such projects in the future.
While this document proposes certain quantitative impact reporting metrics, the GBP also encourages issuers toprovide qualitative information in relation to their clean transportation projects, whether they be focused on reducing
pollution or focused on improved use of resources. Such qualitative information is also encouraged to provide fora meaningful contextualisation of the baseline situation and the improvement as a result of the project. For cleantransportation projects, this information may be especially meaningful when it covers the entire life-cycle, including
the decommissioning of vehicles, as well as the local and/or regional context in which the project is undertaken. In
evaluating the environmental and sustainability benefits of clean transportation projects, it may be useful for issuers
to reference the “sustainable transport hierarchy” in any qualitative reporting on their transportation strategy. Thisseeks to prioritise those activities that are optimal in managing resources and protecting the environment.
While the GBP category, as noted above, uses the term “clean transportation”, the Green Bond market aims tofinance projects that make a significant contribution to environmental sustainability. This therefore may be deemed
to encompass all ambitious “cleaner” transport projects that represent meaningful progress towards this goal.
Furthermore, examples of benchmarks developed by internationally recognised conventions and initiatives are
given below. These should not be seen as baselines for the determination of clean transportation projects: incertain jurisdictions, meeting an internationally recognised standard may require a significant improvement beyond“business as usual”, whereas in other geographies the same standard may represent a mandatory baseline. In
such cases, an eligible transportation project may be expected to drive for a meaningful outperformance of thebenchmark.

16 This document therefore excludes, for example, the management of ship-generated waste and associated waste reception facilities, the decommissioning ofvehicles, as well as improvements to water usage associated with the clean transportation project.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

20

This sustainable transport hierarchy may be presented in the following schematic form:
A - S - I Approach

Avoid / Reduce

Shift / Maintain

Improve

Reduce or avoid
the need totravel or transport

Shift to or maintainshare of moreenvironmentallyfriendly modes

Improve the energy
efficiency of transportmodes andvehicles technology

SystemEfficiency

Trip
Efficiency

VehicleEfficiency

As can be seen from this diagrammatic representation17 of the “Avoid-Shift-Improve (ASI)” approach, demand
reduction is the preferred option, followed sequentially by modal shift, and finally by transport efficiency
improvements. Descriptive examples for each of these options are contained under Guidance and Definitions below.
The proposed core and other sustainability indicators are designed to facilitate quantitative reporting at a project
and/or at a portfolio level across geographies. The importance of the geographic context in the assessment ofsolutions reinforces the benefit of providing additional relevant information. We therefore encourage disclosure on
the national, regional and local context, including information on the population served, pollution levels, and specific
CO2 electricity grid baselines. Such information, as well as the rate and level of shift under the ASI approach helps
to understand and provide more accurate assessments of the environmental impacts/benefits of the project in its
context. Additional qualitative reporting is also encouraged.
For a meaningful assessment of the aggregate impact of projects, consistency in the methods of calculation,baselines and benchmarks is necessary. Thus for the purpose of data quality, issuers are encouraged to disclose
additional technical reports and/or data verification protocols where additional information could be provided aswell as links to the sources of such data and methods of calculation. The robustness of disclosures and/or theunderlying methodology may be enhanced by making available any independent assessment from consultants,
verification bodies and/or institutions with recognised expertise in environmental sustainability.

Guidance and Definitions
Clean transportation activities at each level of the ASI sustainable transport hierarchy may be describedas follows:Avoid/Reduce:• Any operation that avoids the need to travel or reduces the length of travel, including through integrated
land-use planning, and transport demand management18.
Shift/Maintain:• Any operation that moves people or freight to a more sustainable and less polluting means of transportation,such as cycling, walking, buses, ferries, trains and trams.
Improve:• Any operation that reduces the emissions (both GHG and local pollutants) of vehicles or the transport system.
17 Ref: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH
18 Improved internet connectivity may also contribute significantly, to the avoidance or reduction of travel, however, it does not fit readily into the Clean
Transportation project category.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202021

Core Indicators
A. Clean Transportation Projects– Procurement and/or deployment of clean transportation (modal shift)
Any operation that moves people or freight to a significantly more sustainable and less polluting means oftransportation– Deployment of clean transportation (low emissions)
Any operation that reduces GHG emissions and/or air pollutants per unit of service provided through, forexample, fuel switch or technology switch taking account of fuel production and electricity generation,
including projected changes19
B. Construction of Clean Transport Infrastructure20– Construction, extension and/or improvement to core sustainable transport infrastructure
e.g. constructing or electrifying train tracks, clean utility connections in port, constructing or improving
bicycle lanes, bicycle parking and bicycle sharing schemes– Construction and/or improvement to the auxiliary sustainable transport infrastructure e.g. stations,terminals, electric vehicle charging infrastructure, network and traffic management systems, connected
and automated transport technologies, smart mobility systems, and the development and deployment ofalternative transport fuels
Indicators:• Passenger-kilometres (i.e. the transport of one passenger over one kilometre) and/or passengers; or tonnekilometres (i.e. the transport of one tonne over one kilometre) and/or tonnes• Annual GHG emissions reduced/avoided in tCO2–e p.a.
• Reduction of air pollutants: particulate matter (PM), sulphur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon
monoxide (CO), and non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs)
Benchmarks:– Internationally recognised benchmark standards for Clean Transport (e.g. EURO VI Standard, IMO,MARPOL, and WHO guidelines for particulate matter concentration)– Internationally recognised tools for calculating Greenhouse Gases (GHG) in sustainable transportation
projects such as the Global Fuel Economy Initiative (GFEI) in the IEA 2DS.
– Internationally recognised benchmark standards for sustainable transport infrastructure.
– IEC/IEEE 80005 -2:2016 for utility connections in port

19 For example, deployment of electric vehicles may be considered a clean transportation project although it may not necessarily reduce GHG emissions in thenear term.
20 Tracks or auxiliary infrastructure projects that are substantially for the transportation of fossil-fuel related freight should be excluded.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202022

Other Sustainability Indicators#1) Deployment of clean transportation
Indicators:• Annual Absolute (gross) GHG emissions in tCO2–e• Number of clean vehicles deployed (e.g. electric)• Estimated reduction in car/truck use in number of kilometres driven or as share of total transport ridership• Estimated reduction in fuel consumption#2) Construction or improvement to core infrastructure
Indicators:• Annual Absolute (gross) GHG emissions in tCO2–e• Total in kilometres of new or improved train lines/dedicated bus, BRT, LRT corridors bicycle lanes• Reduction in weather-related disruption (days p.a). and/or risk frequency (%)• Ambient noise reduction from the transport infrastructure in decibels• Estimated change in land consumption for transport infrastructure• Number of hectares compensated21• Number of wildlife crossings created• Volume of re-used or recycled rail material for rail, or port infrastructure in tons
#3) Construction or improvement to auxiliary infrastructure
Indicators:• Annual Absolute (gross) GHG emissions in tCO2–e• Improved luminance or road surface reflection coefficient (cd/m2)• Number of LED or SSL lighting fixtures with lumen/watt (Lm/W).
• Ambient noise reduction in decibels#4) Projects aimed at avoidance or reduction of transport use
Indicators:• Annual Absolute (gross) GHG emissions in tCO2–e• Land use density including ‘transit oriented development’ (people and jobs per unit of land area)• Estimated reduction in car use in number of kilometres driven or as share of total transport ridership• Increase of households with internet access (absolute or percentage)• Reduction in congestion22

21 The securing of an equivalent area to the land utilised by the infrastructure project should have comparable conservation value
22 calculated on the vehicle speed (based on https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/eur-scientific-and-technical-research-reports/measuring-roadcongestion)

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

23

6. Green Buildings
The indicators proposed herein aim to capture and illustrate the environmental and sustainability benefits ofprojects relating to green buildings, which are recognised by the GBP for Green Projects under one of the ten
broad categories of eligibility for Green Projects:“green buildings which meet regional, national or internationally recognised standards or certifications”.
The GBP category for Green Buildings is understood to address broad considerations such as water usage andwaste management in addition to energy consumption, whereas a focus solely on energy-efficiency and low
carbon in buildings would come under the GBP category “energy efficiency (such as in new and refurbishedbuildings…)”, and it is therefore recommended that these projects be reported using the relevant indicators andtemplates outlined in reference to Energy Efficiency in chapter IV.2 and chapter V respectively.
This document does not cover impact reporting on projects focused specifically on resilience to climate change,
which may be deemed to fall under another GBP category: “climate change adaptation”. The authors of thisdocument acknowledge the importance of developing harmonised indicators for such projects as well.
While this document proposes certain quantitative impact reporting metrics, the GBP also encourages issuers
to provide qualitative information in relation to their green building projects, whether they be for new buildings or
the retrofitting of existing buildings. Such qualitative information is also encouraged to provide for a meaningfulcontextualisation of the baseline situation and the improvement as a result of the project. For green building
projects, as is highlighted in the aforementioned wording of this GBP category, regional, national or (optimally)
internationally recognised standards or certifications are key, providing important baselines against which the green
building project can be benchmarked. Other salient information such as the siting of the building and its purpose
may be critical to understanding the design of the project, and its benefits in managing resources and protecting
the environment. Indeed, while, as aforementioned, this document does not cover impact reporting on projects
focussed specifically on resilience to climate change, which may be deemed to fall under the GBP categoryof “climate change adaptation” for which specific metrics are yet to be proposed, the reporting of pertinent
information on building resiliency to address such risks as flood prevention, heat stress and water shortages isnevertheless strongly encouraged.
While the GBP category, as noted above, uses the term “green buildings”, the Green Bond market aims tofinance projects that make a significant contribution to environmental sustainability. This therefore may be deemed
to encompass all ambitious “sustainable” building projects that represent meaningful progress towards thisgoal across all core dimensions. Although the highest potential to reduce energy consumption will result from
improvements made to the existing building stock, we recognise that the needs of society and the economy
will continue to drive demand for new buildings. While the construction phase will have a significant impact on
the environment, including the climate, and few if any new buildings are, in reality, “zero energy buildings”, we
nonetheless understand the GBP’s Green Building category to encompass any new building that minimises theimpact of both its construction and life-cycle use on the environment in line with ambitious regulatory requirements
and best industry practice.
Furthermore, examples of benchmarks developed by internationally recognised conventions and initiatives are
given below. These should not be seen as baselines for the determination of green building projects: in certain
jurisdictions, meeting an internationally recognised standard may require a significant improvement beyond“business as usual”, whereas in other geographies the same standard may represent a mandatory baseline. In
such cases, an eligible green building project may be expected to drive for a meaningful outperformance of thebenchmark.
The proposed core and other sustainability indicators are designed to facilitate quantitative reporting at a project
and/or at a portfolio level across geographies. The importance of the geographic context in the assessmentof solutions reinforces the benefit of additional disclosures, such as the national, regional and local context,
information on the population served, pollution levels, and specific CO2 electricity grid baselines. Where fossil
fuels are used on-site, it will be important to understand whether these are lower carbon content fuels and how
the project promotes the transition to “Zero Net Carbon”. While the Core Indicators proposed focus on theconstruction, development and refurbishment of Green Buildings, and are thus also relevant to their purchase,several Other Sustainability Indicators are relevant to the management of Green Buildings over time.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202024

For a meaningful assessment of the aggregate impact of projects, consistency in the methods of calculation,baselines and benchmarks is necessary. Thus for the purpose of data quality, issuers are encouraged to disclose
additional technical reports and/or data verification protocols where additional information could be provided aswell as links to the sources of such data and methods of calculation. The robustness of disclosures and/or theunderlying methodology may be enhanced by making available any independent assessment from consultants,
verification bodies and/or institutions with recognised expertise in environmental sustainability such as LEED,BREEAM and BEAM. We note, however, that many of these assessments and standards incorporate evaluations
that extend beyond environmental factors, and thus issuers should seek to provide greater transparency on theirscores against the “green” requirements.

Guidance and Definitions
New Buildings:	New construction and the development of buildings must take account of theirimpact on ecosystems and biodiversity. Where no certification standard is available
or where the certification standard referenced does not provide an analysis oflocation considerations, these should be highlighted in reporting in particular
to demonstrate how construction activities have avoided building on land thatshould be protected, how access to public transportation is incorporated, and any
measures taken to offset negative impacts on biodiversity.
Retrofitted Buildings:	The retrofit, upgrade or renovation of an existing building, building unit, or any
building component or system should take into consideration all efforts to improveenergy performance (or reduce energy use for comparable quality of enabling
environment and for comparable services) in order to meet some minimum energy
efficiency criteria whenever this is technically, functionally and economically feasible.
Where both the purpose of the building and its use remain unchanged, theimproved performance of the building can be reported against that attained prior
to the project. Where the purpose and/or use of the building has been altered, theimproved performance should be measured against baselines and benchmarks
applicable to new buildings.
Energy Use:	The annual energy input to the building in order to satisfy the energy needs
associated with a typical use of the building and by the building services thatprovide an enabling environment in the building. It encompasses the amount ofenergy needed to meet the energy demand associated with, inter alia, energy used
for heating, cooling, air-conditioning, ventilation, hot water and lighting.
Primary Energy Use:	Energy from renewable and non-renewable sources used in buildings and which
has not undergone any conversion or transformation process. For further guidanceon calculation of Primary Energy Use including renewable energy generated onsite, ISO EN standards or applicable national methodologies for energy and carbon
performance assessment in buildings.
Final Energy Use:	The total energy consumed by end-users in their building assets. It is the energy
which reaches the final user’s asset and excludes the energy used by the energy
sector itself.
Gross Building Area (GBA):	Gross Building Area, also named Gross Floor Area (“GFA”) corresponds to thetotal floor area contained in a building measured to the external walls. The physicalenvironmental impact comes from the entire building, and therefore Gross Building
Area is more relevant than Gross Letting Area, which is the amount of floor space
available to be rented.
Certification Schemes:	While the importance of international certification schemes as industry benchmarks
is highlighted by their prime position in the proposed Core Indicators, theassociated costs and processes may be deemed prohibitive for small local
players, or large portfolios of very small assets. Locally applicable proxies may
therefore provide a relevant baseline when compatible with the major international
certification schemes.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202025

Core Indicators23
A. Energy Performance#1 Final and/or Primary Energy Use - in new buildings or retrofitted buildings
Indicators:• kWh/m² of GBA p.a.; and % of energy use reduced/avoided vs local baseline/building code; and, if relevant% of renewable energy (RE) generated on site (specifying the relevant RE form)
B. Carbon Performance#2 Carbon reductions - in new buildings or retrofitted buildings
Indicators:• kgCO2/m² of GBA p.a; and• Annual GHG emissions reduced/avoided24 in tonnes of CO2 equiv. vs local baseline/baseline certificationlevel; and/or• % of carbon emissions reduced/avoided vs local baseline/baseline certification level
C. Water Efficiency and Savings#3 Water efficiency - in new buildings or retrofitted buildings
Indicators:• m³/ m² of GBA p.a ; and Annual absolute (gross) water use before and after the project in m³/a (for retrofitted
buildings) and/or• % of water reduced/avoided vs local baseline/baseline certification level/IGCC /International Plumbing CodeD. Waste Management#4 Waste management in the construction/demolition/refurbishment process in new or retrofitted buildings
Indicators:• Amount p.a. of waste minimised, reused or recycled in % of total waste and/or in absolute (gross) amountin tonnes p.a.
• Waste removed in tonnes
E. Certification Standard, if available#5 Type of scheme, certification level and m2 GBA
Benchmarks:
Internationally and nationally recognised standards for Green Buildings such as LEED (Leadership in Energy andEnvironmental Design), BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method), ANSI/ASHRAE/IES/USGBC Standard 189.1 Standard for the Design of High-Performance Green Buildings and/or
the International Green Construction Code; other standards for Green Buildings widely known and/or used in
the industry locally, such as CEEQUAL, DGNB, EDGE, the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), the
US Property Assessed Clean Energy Programs (PACE), Passive House or Swiss Minergie, when compatible
with the aforementioned standards; National Minimum Requirements for Energy Efficiency in Buildings in EU
states (based on the EU Energy Efficiency Directive) and Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs), or national
certification schemes.

23 Issuers that report on energy-efficient buildings are recommended to refer to core indicators and reporting templates of the energy efficiency section of thishandbook (please see chapters IV.2 and V. respectively).
24 International guidelines for the calculation of emissions avoided, such as the GHG Protocol may provide further guidance for calculations.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202026

Other Sustainability Indicators#1) Use of materials with lower environmental footprint - for both new buildings and retrofitted buildings
Indicators:• Embodied energy (and carbon) over life-cycle (“cradle to grave”), in tons CO2• % of embodied energy (and carbon) reduced over life-cycle (“cradle to grave”), vs local benchmark/baseline#2) Land Use and Biodiversity – for new buildings
Indicators:• Land remediated/decontaminated/regenerated, in ha or m²• % of unadulterated Green spaces before and after the project#3) Water Efficiency - for both new buildings and retrofitted buildings
Indicators:• Amount of rainwater harvested and reused in m³/a
• Recharge to groundwater in mm/d, mm/a#4) Waste Management - in the use of both new buildings or retrofitted buildings
Indicators:• Recycling, re-use or composting of non-hazardous waste in %#5) Indoor Air Quality - for both new buildings and retrofitted buildings
Indicators:• Reduction of particulate matter vs local baseline: sulphur oxides (SOx), and nitrogen oxides (NOx) carbon
monoxide (CO), (PM2.5/PM10) and non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs)#6) Light quality and energy efficiency - for both new buildings and retrofitted buildings
Indicators:• Number of LED or SSL lighting fixtures with lumen/watt (Lm/W)• Energy efficiency from installation of motion detectors (kWh) vs baseline/previous equipment• Energy efficiency from installation of low-E window glass panels vs baseline/previous equipment#7) Transport connectivity and clean transportation infrastructure – for both new buildings and retrofitted
buildings
Indicators:• Land use density including ‘transit oriented development’ (people and jobs per unit of land area)• Number of Electric vehicle charging stations as a % of total parking and/or number of bicycle facilities
provided• Distance (in Km) to public transportation (thereby reducing the scope 3 emissions of the building).

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

27

7. Biodiversity
The indicators proposed herein aim to capture and illustrate the environmental and sustainability benefits of projects
relating to biodiversity, which are recognised by the GBP for Green Projects under one of the ten broad categories
of eligibility for Green Projects:“terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity conservation (including the protection of coastal, marine and watershedenvironments)”.
While we understand biodiversity projects to also include those that are focused on the conservation and restorationof natural landscapes, including forests, this document only partially covers biodiversity in agricultural production
systems, e.g. the transfer of unsustainable agricultural production into biodiverse food systems (agroecology) or
biodiversity in urban environments. The authors of this document acknowledge the importance of developing
harmonised indicators for such projects as well, which predominantly fall under the separate GBP project categoryof “environmentally sustainable management of living natural resources and land use”.
Biodiversity describes the variety of life on earth and the natural pattern it forms. It is understood in terms of a wide
variety of plants, animals and microorganisms. Fragmentation, degradation, and outright loss of forests, wetlands,
coral reefs, and other ecosystems pose the gravest threat to biological diversity.
According to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 25, three dimensions are key to biodiversity:• The conservation of biological diversity (genetic diversity, species diversity and habitat diversity).
• The sustainable use of biological diversity.
• The fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilisation of genetic resources.
Biodiversity should be the primary or secondary goal of any project or portfolio of projects reported under thisGBP category. Projects that focus primarily on other targets and approach biodiversity from the perspective ofminimizing damage or managing biodiversity risks in projects should not fall under the biodiversity project category.
Projects targeting biodiversity are, for example, focused on safeguarding and/or developing protected terrestrial
and marine areas and systems, forest conservation, or REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest
Degradation) and typically require a preliminary analysis and inventory of core species that need protection.
As the focus and objectives of biodiversity projects are highly dependent on individual circumstances of the relevant
habitat, it is crucial to provide information on the core dimensions of the project, its specific characteristics and the metrics
to analyse the results. The importance of the geographic context in the assessment of solutions reinforces the benefit ofadditional disclosures, such as the national, regional and local context and information on the population served.
While this document proposes certain specific quantitative impact reporting metrics, providing qualitative
information, including all strategies, actions and plans for managing the impacts on biodiversity, appears to beof particular relevance for biodiversity projects. Such qualitative information is also encouraged to provide ameaningful context for understanding and assessing the baseline situation and the improvement as a result of the
project, which may be further complemented by more general indicators such as Mean Species Abundance (MSA)and Potentially Disappeared Fraction (PDF) of species.
A key aspect should be the improvement of income and living conditions for the communities living adjacent toprotected areas, for example through tourism or forest management. These measures aim to ensure that local
people benefit from conservation and the sustainable use of natural resources, thus enhancing the conservationof protected areas’ buffer zones and biological corridors.
For the purpose of data quality, issuers are encouraged to disclose additional technical reports, environmental
impact assessments and/or data verification protocols where additional information could be provided, as well as
links to the sources of such data and methods of calculation. The robustness of disclosures and/or the underlying
methodology may be enhanced by making available any independent assessment from consultants, verification
bodies and/or institutions with recognised expertise in environmental sustainability26.
25 The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is a multilateral treaty that was opened for signing at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. It
has been ratified by the vast majority of countries worldwide.
26 There are a number of organisations working on biodiversity impacts, especially focusing on biodiversity accounting, biodiversity footprint measurement and/or qualitative guidance forprojects, which may provide a helpful reference, including ASN Bank, Biodiversity Accounting Financials, Capitals Coalition, CDC Biodiversité, EU Business@Biodiversity, GIIN, IUCN,UNEP FI, WBCSD, WWF

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202028

Core Indicators
A. Protected areas and Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measures (OECM)27#1 Preserving terrestrial natural habitats#2 Preserving marine natural habitats
Indicators:• Maintenance/safeguarding/increase of protected area/OECM/habitat in km² and in % for increase• Absolute number of predefined target organisms and species per km² (bigger fauna) or m² (smaller fauna andflora) before and after the project• Absolute number of protected and/or priority species that are deemed sensitive in protected/conserved area
before and after the project• Changes in the CO2, nutrient and/or pH levels for coastal vegetation, and coral reefs in %28• Absolute number of invading species and/or area occupied by invading species in m² or km² before and after
the project
Benchmarks:• IUCN Categories for Protected Areas (https://www.iucn.org/theme/protected-areas/about/protectedarea-categories) and Management Effectiveness Tool (https://www.iucn.org/sites/dev/files/import/
downloads/maangementeffectiveness2008.pdf)
Note: Indicators referencing differences “before and after the project” may use ex-ante estimates of the project results before project completion.

B. Landscape conservation/restoration
Including Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD)
Indicators:• Maintenance/safeguarding/increase of natural landscape area (including forest) in km² and in % for increase• Maintenance/safeguarding/increase of natural landscape area in urban areas in km² and in % for increase• Increase of area under certified land management29 in km² or m² and in % (in bufferzones of protected areas) 30• Absolute number of indigenous species, flora or fauna (trees, shrubs and grasses…) restored through the
project• Annual GHG emissions reduced in tCO2-e p.a.
Benchmarks:• Internationally recognised benchmark standards for sustainable forest management (e.g. FSC, PEFC,
Rainforest Alliance)

Other Sustainability Indicators• Number of conservation workers (e.g. game wardens, rangers, natural park officials) trained in biodiversity
conservation• Number of forestry personnel trained in biodiversity conservation• Number of farmers trained in sustainable farming and biodiversity• Improvement of income of local populations in percentage• Number and/or capacity of nurseries created under the project in terms of seedlings or number of individual
trees/shrubs per year

27 IUCN-WCPA 2018 definition of OECM is “A geographically defined space, not recognised as a protected area, which is governed and managed over the long-term in ways that deliver
the effective in-situ conservation of biodiversity, with associated ecosystem services and cultural and spiritual values”.
28 Issuers are encouraged to provide additional information for coastal and marine areas, for example on maintenance and restoration of coastal vegetation like mangroves; the increaseof health of coral reefs by reducing disease (degree of bleaching, age and size of living corals), as well as by reducing the sedimentation rate, nutrients in water and direct humandamage.
29 Certified land management is an externally audited set of processes and activities that seek to improve environmental and animal welfare outcomes together with improvements in the
productivity and risk management of landholdings.
30 This should not be reported as a sole indicator, but in conjunction with information on the corresponding protected area.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202029

Guidance and Definitions for Additional Human Rights and Social Disclosures
Assessing the improvements in living conditions for communities upholds the primacy of human rights
considerations, which may include:
1. The right to free, prior and informed consultation and consent (FPIC) of indigenous peoples,
2. Other participation and co-determination rights, including complaint mechanisms,
3. Resettlements and restricted access to and use of natural resources (physical and economic displacement)
resulting from the establishment and management of protected areas,
4. Rebuilding the livelihoods of the local population, compensation arrangements,
5. Human rights violations in the context of combating poaching and law enforcement,
6. Handling historical cases of injustice concerning the establishment of protected areas (e.g. lack of consultation,lack of support for rebuilding lost livelihoods) that still have an impact on the present day-situation.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202030

8. Climate change adaptation
The indicators proposed herein aim to capture and illustrate the environmental and other sustainability benefits ofprojects relating to climate change adaptation, which are recognised by the GBP for Green Projects under one of
the ten broad categories of eligibility for Green Projects:“climate change adaptation (including information support systems, such as climate observation and early
warning systems)”
Climate change adaptation projects are sector and context specific, and therefore no proposed set of indicators will
likely cover all sectors and contexts. Nevertheless, the authors believe that there is a significant benefit in offering
exemplars for a range of such projects.
We understand adaptation projects to be those that are focused on enhancing preparedness and resilience toexpected changes in climate, as well as any actual changes experienced. This would not only include projects
that seek to moderate or avoid its likely or potential harmful effects on people, nature and/or economic activities
and assets (e.g. infrastructure, buildings), but may also encompass those investments that provide sustained
adaptive solutions, such as fireproof roofs and other building elements to withstand higher temperatures, watermanagement systems for irrigation, and climate change monitoring systems. While the terms “climate change
adaptation” and “climate resilience” may be defined distinctly to differentiate between the adaptation actions taken
in order to achieve the goal of resilience, we believe that for the purposes of providing indicators, climate change
adaptation and/or resilient projects and investments may be used interchangeably.
According to the Climate Bond Initiative’s Climate Resilience Principles31, there are two types of climate resilience
investments: those that are primarily focussed on enhancing the resilience of an asset; and those that principally
seek to enhance the resilience of the broader system. There are nevertheless interlinkages between the two, and
it is important in evaluating the impact of any climate adaptation investment that there is no negative impact on
the system of which it forms part. A context-specific approach is always required in climate change adaptation32,
reflecting the importance of the geographic and location specific context in the assessment of the project’s climate
vulnerabilities and the identification of appropriate solutions. This highlights the importance of additional disclosures,such as the national, regional and local vulnerabilities and physical climate-related risks.
The following flow chart provides guidance for projects that are primarily focused on enhancing the resilience ofan asset:
Process-based approach to climate change adaptation

Source: KfW 202031 http://www.climatebonds.net/adaptation-and-resilience32 As set out in the Joint MDB Adaptation Finance Tracking Methodology

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202031

While this document proposes certain quantitative impact reporting metrics, providing qualitative information is ofparticular relevance for climate change adaptation/resilience projects. This document aims to provide a meaningfulcontext for understanding the baseline situation and the amelioration of the assessed vulnerability as a result of
the project. Relevant disclosures may include climate change scenarios, time horizons and processes employedfor determining the key weather and climate-related risks and their likely relative probability and severity, as well as
all strategies, actions and plans for managing the vulnerabilities.
Where a project is deemed to deliver significant climate resilience benefits to GHG emission intensive assets oroperations, issuers should disclose their approach and their assessment of the extent of the relative trade-off
between climate mitigation and climate resilience.
Impact reporting on climate resilience investments is typically at an outcome level33 on an ex-ante basis measured
against the expected situation in a “no action” scenario. Such assets may be most easily categorised relative to theclimate-related hazard34 that the climate change adaptation/resilience project(s) seek(s) to address, withstand and/or ameliorate. Some projects may be deemed to relate to more than one climate hazard, such as the reforesting ofcoastal land, which may serve to reduce wave and flood damage, as well as reducing erosion, and the expected
impacts of such projects may therefore be reported in relation to all relevant climate hazards.
This document builds on the previous work published by the GBP Impact Reporting Working Group, including
for impact reporting on sustainable water and wastewater projects, clean transportation, green buildings andbiodiversity projects. The indicators proposed here focus only on supplementary indicators associated with climatechange adaptation/resilience projects, and issuers are encouraged to report the co-benefits of projects withreference to such other suggested metrics.
For the purpose of data quality, issuers are encouraged to disclose additional technical reports and/or data
verification protocols where supplementary information could be provided, as well as links to the sources ofsuch data and methods of calculation. The robustness of disclosures and/or the underlying methodology may
be enhanced by making available any independent assessment from consultants, verification bodies and/or
institutions with recognised expertise in environmental sustainability.
Examples of Climate-Related Hazards and Adaptation/Resilience Outcomes
Climate Hazard:

Temperature-Related:

Wind-Related:

Water-Related:

Land-Related:

Examples:HeatwavesCold snaps
Wildfires
Temperature variability
Thawing of the permafrost
Increasing heat stressTyphoons/hurricanes
Dust
Storms/sandstorms
Floods/ heavy precipitation
Droughts
Glacial flooding
Rising sea-levels
Increasing water stressHydrological variability
Landslides
Avalanches
Subsidence
Soil erosion
Soil degradation

Adaptation Outcomes

Reduce or avoid damage/disruption

Reduce or avoid damage/disruption
Reduce or avoid damage/disruption
Increase water availability
Reduce or avoid damage/disruption
Increase productivity

Climate-related damage to assets may result in a rise in risk frequency and/or harm to assets/life/livelihoods orin a reduction in the serviceable life of assets.
Climate-related disruption may result in lost revenue or income through the reduction in the amount of time thata system or a component of a system is operable, or due to a lowering of the productivity of the system or asset.
It is also possible to categorise climate change adaptation projects in terms of sectors (e.g. health, infrastructure,
agriculture), as another means of reflecting that projects may need to be designed to cope with multiple hazards,
and an illustrative guide is provided in Appendix.
33 In line with the Climate Resilience Metrics Framework developed by the Multilateral Development Banks and development finance institutions:
https://www.ebrd.com/cs/Satellite?c=Content&cid=1395285114859&pagename=EBRD%2FContent%2FDownloadDocument
34 A classification of climate-related hazards is set out in the EU Sustainable Finance Taxonomy: https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/sustainable-finance-teg-taxonomy_en

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

32

Exemplary Indicators
A. Temperature-Related
Indicators:#1 Reducing or avoiding weather-related damage• Increase in grid resilience, energy generation, transmission/distribution and storage in MWh• Reduction in the number of wildfires, and/or in the area damaged by wildfires in km²• Reduction in emergency and unplanned rail and tarmac replacement in km#2 Reducing or avoiding weather-related disruption• Increase in grid resilience, generation and storage in MWh
B. Wind-Related
Indicators:#3 Reducing or avoiding weather-related damage• Reduction in repair costs due to storms (to all kinds of infrastructure and assets)#4 Reducing or avoiding weather-related disruption• Reduction in the number of customers/employees suffering loss of power / transport services• Reduction in the number of power lines incapacitated due to storms
C. Water-Related
Indicators:#5 Reducing or avoiding weather-related damage• Reduction in flood damage costs• Reduction in number of operating days lost to floods• Reduced/avoided water loss (in reservoirs/waterways/natural habitats etc.) in m³• Reduction in land-loss from inundation and/or coastal erosion in km²#6 Reducing or avoiding weather-related disruption• Reduction in number of operating days lost to floods#7 Increased water availability• Additional water availability and/or increased water catchment in m³/year• Reduction in household demand for clean water in m³/year
D. Land-Related
Indicators:#8 Reducing or avoiding weather-related damage• Reduction in repair costs and/or operating days lost due to landslides• Increase in area under wetland management in km²#9 Reducing or avoiding weather-related disruption• Reduction in the number of operating days lost to disrupted transport networks or other infrastructure#10 Increased agricultural productivity• Reduction in changes in the nutrient and/or pH level for agricultural soils• Increase in agricultural land using more drought resistant crops in hectares• Area cultivated by precision agriculture in km²
Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202033

Other Sustainability Indicators• Increased number of urban residents with access to thermally safe conditions in buildings/transport systems• Increased number of households with access to resilient energy systems• Increased number of people/businesses/acres with secure water supply• Decrease in climate-related risk insurance premia• Reduced number of people suffering from flood-related infections• Reduced number of people evacuated/injured/displaced/economically unproductive due to climate-related
hazards• Reduction in workforce absenteeism due to climate-related health impacts• Reduced/avoided loss of livestock and/or crops• Number of kms of road, rail or other infrastructure adapted• Decrease in the number of days between a disaster and the related response and recovery.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202034

Appendix
A sectoral categorisation of climate adaptation/resilience projects may include, but is not limited to the following
examples:- Health•

Direct effect (drowning from floods, stroke from temperature, etc.) and non-communicable disease•

Vector-borne•

Water-borne•

Malnutrition•

Labour productivity (especially outdoor)- Infrastructure
•

•

•

•

•

Power system–

Repairs (in pecuniary value)–

Reliability of service (in days with disruptions)

Water system–

Repairs–

Reliability of service

Transport system–

Repairs–

Reliability of service

Communication system–

Repairs–

Reliability of service

Flood management- Human settlements and buildings•

Operation and maintenance (e.g, air conditioning costs)•

Repairs (e.g., flood damages)•

Quality of life (e.g., thermal comfort, death risks)- Agriculture and forestry and food security•

Food production and costs•

Soil and water conservation- Ecosystem and environment•

Biodiversity•

Services (e.g., water filtration, flood control)- Social systems•

Social protection•

Financial inclusion•

Health care coverage- Information and decision-making•

Data collection•

Early warning systems•

Data dissemination and decision support to include future climate risks in decision-making

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

35

V. Reporting Templates
Renewable Energy
Illustrative Summary Template for Project-by-Project Report:
Renewable
Energy (RE)SignedAmounta/

Share of
Total Project
Financingb/

Eligibility forgreen bonds

RE
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project
lifetimed/#2) Annual
generation(electricity /other)

Project namef/currency%% of signed
amount% of signed
amountcurrency

in years

MW/
GWhe.g. Project 2

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

GJ/
TJ

XX

XX

#3) a)#3) b) Renewable
Renewableenergy capacity
energyrehabilitatedcapacity added
MW

XX

MW

XX

#1) Annual
GHG emissions
reduced/avoidede/Other Indicators

in tonnes of CO2
equivalent
Capacity of RE
plant(s) to be servedby transmission
systems (MW)XX t CO2 eq. Absoluteannual projectemissions.

XX

Illustrative Summary Template for Portfolio-based Report35:

Renewable
Energy (RE)SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Portfolio
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Portfolio
namecurrency

%

%

e.g.
Portfolio 2

XX

XX

XX

RE
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Average
portfolio
lifetimed/#2) Annual
generation(electricity/other),possibly per unitof financing%

currency

years

MWh/
GWh

XX

XX

XX

XX

GJ/TJ

XX

#3) a) Renewableenergy capacity
added (possibly perunit of financing)MWXX#1) Annual#3) b) Renewable
GHG emissions
energy capacity
reduced/avoided
rehabilitated(possibly per(possibly per unit
unit of financing)of financing)
e/
MW

XX

Other Indicators(possibly per unitof financing)in tonnes of CO2
equivalentXX

Capacity of RE
plant(s) to be servedby transmission
systems (MW)XX t CO2 eq.
Absolute annual
portfolio emissions

35 The issuer should disclose the approach underlying the results (see item 6. of the core principles/recommendations), i.e. specify whether the portfolio report:• Aggregates project-by-project results including only the pro-rated share (as a percentage of the issuer’s share of the total financing) of the total projects’ results (portfolio report based on project-by-project
allocations), or• Reports only of the overall results of the portfolio (portfolio report based on portfolio allocations).

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202036

Energy Efficiency
Illustrative Summary Template for Project-by-Project Report:
Energy Efficiency(EE)

SignedAmounta/

Share of
Total Project
Financingb/

Eligibility for greenbonds

EE component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project
lifetimed/Project namef/currency%% of signed
amount% of signed amountcurrency

in yearse.g. Project 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

#1) Annual
energy savings(electricity /other)
MWh/
GJ/TJ
GWh
XX

#2) Annual GHG
emissions reduced/
avoidede/in tonnes of CO2
equivalent

XX

XX

Other Indicators

XX people benefited;
XXX t CO2 eq.
Absolute annual
project emissions.

Illustrative Summary Template for Portfolio-based Report:
EnergyEfficiency (EE)

SignedAmounta/

Share of Total
Portfolio
Financingb/

Eligibility
for greenbonds

EE
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Average
portfolio lifetimed/Portfolio namecurrency%%%

currency

years

e.g.
Portfolio 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

#1) Annual energy savings(electricity / other),possibly per unit offinancing
MWh
GJ/TJ
/GWh
XX

XX

#2) Annual GHG emissions
reduced/avoided (possibly
per unit of financing)e/Other Indicators
per unit (possibly
per unit offinancing)in tonnes of CO2 equivalentXX

XX people benefited;
XX t CO2 eq.
Absolute annual
project emissions.

37

Sustainable Water and Wastewater Management
Illustrative Summary Template for Project-by-Project Report:
Sustainable
Water
Management
Projects

SignedAmounta/

Share of
Total Project
Financingb/

Eligibility forgreen bonds

Sustainable Water
Management
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project
lifetimed/#1) Annual absolute(gross) watersavingse/

Project namef/currency%% of signed a
mount% of signed amountcurrency

in yearsin m3/ain %e.g. Project 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Wastewater
Treatment
Projects

SignedAmounta/

Share of
Total Project
Financingb/

Project namef/currency

e.g. Project 2

XXEligibility forgreen bonds

Sustainable
Wastewater
Management
Component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project
lifetimed/#2) Annual absolute (gross)amount of wastewater
treated, reused or avoidede/%% of signed
amount% of signed
amountcurrency

in yearsin m3/ain p.e./a

in %

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

Other Indicators~ No. of people with access to clean drinking water (or volume of clean
drinking water in m3/a) through infrastructure supporting sustainable
and efficient water use~N umber of people, or enterprises benefitting from measures tomitigate the consequences of floods etc.

#3) i) Annual absolute(gross) amount of raw/
untreated sewage sludge
that is treated anddisposed ofe/#3) ii) Annual
absolute (gross)amount of sludge
that is reusede/in tonnes ofdry solids
p.a.
XX

in tonnesof drysolids p.a.
XX

in %
XX

in %

Other Indicators~ No. of people withaccess to improved
sanitation facilities

XX

38

Sustainable Water and Wastewater Management (continued)
Illustrative Summary Template for Portfolio-based Report:
Sustainable Water
Management
Portfolios

SignedAmounta/

Share of
Total Projects
Financingb/

Sustainable Water
Management
component

Eligibility for green
bonds

Allocated
Amountc/

Average
Portfolio
lifetimed/#1) Annual absolute(gross) water savingse/Portfolio namecurrency%% of signed
amount% of signed amountcurrency

in yearsin m3/ae.g. Portfolio 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Wastewater
Treatment
Portfolios

SignedAmounta/

Share of
Total Project
Financingb/

Eligibility forgreen bonds

Sustainable
Wastewater
Management
Component

Allocated
Amountc/

Average
Portfolio
lifetimed/#2) Annual absolute (gross)amount of wastewater treated,reused or avoidede/Portfolio
namecurrency%% of signed
amount% of signed
amountcurrency

in yearsin m3/ain p.e./ain %(weighted
average)e.g. Portfolio 2

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

Other Indicators~No. of people with access to clean drinking water(or volume of clean drinking water in m3/a) throughinfrastructure supporting sustainable and efficientin %water use
(weighted
average) ~Number of people, or enterprises benefitting frommeasures to mitigate the consequences of floodsetc.
XX#3) i) Annual absolute(gross) amount of raw/
untreated sewage sludge
that is treated anddisposed ofe/#3) ii) Annual absolute(gross) amount ofsludge that is reused
e/

Other
Indicators

in tonnes ofdry solids
p.a.

in %
(weighted
average)in tonnesof drysolids p.a.

in %(weighted
average)~No. ofpeople withaccess to
improved
sanitation
facilities

XX

XX

XX

XX

39

Waste Management and Resource-Efficiency
Illustrative Summary Template for Project-by-Project Report:
Waste Management
Projects – Resource
Efficiency

SignedAmounta/

Share of
Total Project
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds% of signed
amountProject
lifetimed/#1) i) Waste prevented,
minimised, reused or
recyclede/currency

in yearsin %of total
waste
XX

Waste
Allocated
Management Amountcomponentc/#1) ii) Annual
GHG emissions
reducede/

Other Indicators

in tonnes
p.a.

in tonnes of CO2
equivalent p.a.

~K
 G of raw material per produced unit before andafter~ Added monetary value created using waste~ Products changed to increase waste reduction~ Tons of secondary raw materials or compost
producedXX

XX

Project namef/currency%% ofsignedamounte.g. Project 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Energy Recovery
from Waste Projects

SignedAmounta/

Share of
Total Project
Financingb/

Eligibility
for greenbonds

EnergyRecoveryfrom Waste
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project
lifetimed/#2) i) Annual energy generationfrom non-recyclable waste(electricity/other energy)
e/Project namef/currency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amountcurrency

in yearsin MWh/GWhe.g. Project 2

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Pollution Control
Projects

SignedAmounta/

Share of
Total Project
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Pollution
Control
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project
lifetimed/#2) ii) Annual energy recoveredfrom waste (minus any support
fuel) of net energy generatede/#2) iii) Annual GHG
emissions reducede/

in GJ/TJ

in MWh/GWh/KJ

in tonnes of CO2
equivalent p.a.

XX

XX

XX

#3) Waste separated and/or collected and treated or
disposed in environmentallysound mannere/

Project namef/currency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amountcurrency

in years

in % of total
waste

in tonnes p.a.

e.g. Project 3

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

Other Indicators~N umber of people or % of population with access to waste
collection~ Area with improved regular waste collection service~ How many fractions of waste were separated~ Absolute amount or % of residual non-separated waste~ Number of people or % of population with access to street
sweeping etc.

40

Waste Management and Resource-Efficiency (continued)
Illustrative Summary Template for Portfolio-based Report:
Waste Management
Portfolios –Resource Efficiency

SignedAmounta/

Waste
Management
component

Share of Total
Eligibility for
Projects Financing
green bondsb/

Allocated
Amountc/

Average
Portfolio
lifetimed/#1) i) Waste prevented,
minimised, reused or
recyclede/#1) ii) Annual GHG
emissions reducede/Other Indicators~ KG of raw material per produced unit before
and after~ Added monetary value created using waste~ Products changed to increase waste
reduction~ Tons of secondary raw materials or compost
produced

Portfolio namecurrency%% of signed
amount% of signed
amountcurrency

in yearsin %of total
waste

in tonnes
p.a.

in tonnes of CO2
equivalent p.a.

e.g. Portfolio 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Energy Recovery
from Waste
Portfolios

SignedAmounta/

Share of
Total Projects
Financingb/

Portfolio namecurrency%

e.g. Portfolio 2

XXXX

Pollution Control
Portfolios

SignedAmounta/

Share of
Total Projects
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds% of signed
amountcurrency

in years

in % of total
waste

in tonnes p.a.

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Eligibility
for green
bonds
% of
signedamountXX

Portfolio namecurrency%% ofsignedamounte.g. Portfolio 3

XX

XX

XX

EnergyRecoveryfrom Waste
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Average
Portfolio
lifetimed/% of signed
amountcurrency

in yearsin MWh/GWh

XX

XX

XX

XX

Pollution
Control
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

Average
Portfolio
lifetimed/#2) i) Annual energy generation from
non-recyclable waste (electricity/
other energy)e/#2) ii) Annual energy recoveredfrom waste (minus any support
fuel) of net energy generatede/#2) iii) Annual GHG
emissions reducede/

in GJ/TJ

in MWh/GWh/KJ

in tonnes of CO2
equivalent p.a.

XX

XX

XX

#3) Waste separated and/or collected and treated or
disposed in environmentallysound mannere/Other Indicators~ Number of people or % of population with access to waste collection~ Area with improved regular waste collection service~ How many fractions of waste were separated~ Absolute amount or % of residual non-separated waste~ Number of people or % of population with access to street sweeping~ Km of street with regular street sweeping service coverage etc.

41

Clean Transportation
Illustrative Summary Template for Project-by-Project Report:

Clean
Transportation
Projects

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Project
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Clean
Transportation
project
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project
lifetimed/Passenger-kilometres
and/or passengers
ortonne-kilometres and/or
tonnese/

Annual GHG
emissions
reduced /avoidede/

Reduction of air
pollutantse/Other Indicators~ Annual Absolute (gross) GHG
emissions in tCO2–eParticulate matter (PM),sulphur oxides (SOx),~ Number of clean vehicles deployed
nitrogen oxides (NOx),(e.g. electric)carbon monoxide (CO), ~ Estimated reduction in car/truck use
and non-methane volatilein number of kilometres driven or asorganic compounds
share of total transport ridership(NMVOCs)~ Estimated reduction in fuelconsumption

Project namef/currency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amountcurrency

in yearsPassenger
kilometres
and/orpassengers

Tonnekilometres
and/ortonnesin tonnesof CO2equivalentp.a.

e.g. Project 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Constructionof CleanTransportation
Infrastructure
Projects

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Project
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Constructionof CleanTransportation
Infrastructure
project
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project
lifetimed/Annual GHG
emissions
reduced /avoidede/

Reduction of air
pollutantse/Other Indicators~ Annual Absolute (gross) GHG emissions
in tCO2–e~ Total in kilometres of new or improved
train lines/ dedicated bus, BRT, LRT
corridors bicycle lanes~ Reduction in weather-related disruption(days p.a). and/or risk frequency (%)~ Ambient noise reduction from thetransport infrastructure in decibels etc.
XX

Passenger-kilometres and/or passengers
ortonne-kilometres and/or
tonnese/

Project namef/currency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amountcurrency

in yearsPassenger
kilometres
and/orpassengers

Tonnekilometres
and/ortonnesin tonnesof CO2equivalentp.a.

Particulate matter(PM), sulphur oxides(SOx), nitrogenoxides (NOx), carbon
monoxide (CO), andnon-methane volatileorganic compounds(NMVOCs)e.g. Project 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 202042

Clean Transportation (continued)
Illustrative Summary Template for Portfolio-based Report:

Clean
Transportation
Portfolios

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Project
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Clean
Transportation
portfolio
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Portfolio
lifetimed/Passenger-kilometres
and/or passengers
ortonne-kilometres and/or
tonnese/

Annual GHG
emissions
reduced /avoidede/

Portfolio namecurrency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amountcurrency

in yearsPassenger
kilometres
and/orpassengers

Tonnekilometres
and/ortonnesin tonnesof CO2equivalentp.a.

e.g. Portfolio 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Constructionof CleanTransportation
Infrastructure
Portfolios

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Project
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Constructionof CleanTransportation
Infrastructure
portfolio
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Portfolio
lifetimed/Passenger-kilometres and/or passengers
ortonne-kilometres and/or
tonnese/

Annual GHG
emissions
reduced /avoidede/

Portfolio namecurrency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amountcurrency

in yearsPassenger
kilometres
and/orpassengers

Tonnekilometres
and/ortonnesin tonnesof CO2equivalentp.a.

e.g. Portfolio 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

Reduction of air
pollutantse/Other Indicators~A nnual Absolute (gross) GHG
emissions in tCO2–eParticulate matter (PM),sulphur oxides (SOx),~ Number of clean vehicles deployed
nitrogen oxides (NOx),(e.g. electric)carbon monoxide (CO), ~ Estimated reduction in car/truck use
and non-methane volatilein number of kilometres driven or asorganic compounds
share of total transport ridership(NMVOCs)~ Estimated reduction in fuelconsumption
XX
XX

Reduction of air
pollutantse/Other Indicators~ Annual Absolute (gross) GHG
emissions in tCO2–eParticulate matter (PM), ~ Total in kilometres of new or improved
sulphur oxides (SOx),train lines/ dedicated bus, BRT, LRT
nitrogen oxides (NOx),corridors bicycle lanes
carbon monoxide (CO), ~ Reduction in weather-related
and non-methane volatile
disruption (days p.a). and/or riskorganic compounds
frequency (%)(NMVOCs)~ Ambient noise reduction from thetransport infrastructure in decibels
etc.
XX
XX

43

Green Buildings
Illustrative Core Indicator Summary Template for Project-by-Project Report 26
Share
Green
of Total Eligibility
SignedAllocated
Green
Building
Project for green
AmountBuilding AmountFinancing bonds componenta/c/Projectsb/

Gross
Project
Building
lifetime
Area
d/
(GBA)

#1) Final and/or Primary
Energy Usee/#3) Water
efficiencye/#2) Carbon reductionse/#4) Wastemanagemente/#5) Certification
Standard

Project
name currency
f/

%

% of
signedamount% ofsignedamountcurrency

in years

in m²

waste
minimised,annualtonnesreused,
% of
% of
% of
kgCO2/ of CO2
m³/
water
kWh/
recycled
waste
energy renewablecarbonm² of savings
m² of
m² of
equiv.
in % ofremoved typeuseenergyemissions
GBA in m³/a
GBA
GBA reduced/
total waste in tonnes
reduced/ generated
reduced/p.a. and/or
p.a.
p.a.
avoidedand/or in
avoidedon siteavoidedin %p.a.
tonnesp.a.

e.g.
Project 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

certification
level

XX

XX

Illustrative Core Indicator Summary Template for Portfolio-based Report36:

Green
Building
Portfolios

SignedAmount
a/

Share
Green
of Total Eligibility
Building
Project for green
Financing bonds componentb/

Allocated
Amountc/

Average Gross
Portfolio Building
lifetime
Area
(GBA)
d/

#1) Final and/or Primary
Energy Usee/#2) Carbon reductionse/

Portfolio
namecurrency%% ofsignedamount% ofsignedamountcurrency

in yearsin m²

tonnes
% of
% of
% of
kgCO2/kWh/of COenergy renewablecarbonm² of
m² of
equiv.
useenergyemissions
GBA
GBA reduced/
reduced/ generated
reduced/p.a.
p.a.
avoidedavoidedon siteavoidedp.a.

e.g.
Portfolio 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

#3) Water
efficiencye/#4) Wastemanagemente/#5) Certification
Standard

waste
minimised,annualreused,
waste
m³/
water
recycled inrecertification
m² of savings% of total moved typelevel
GBA in m³/a
waste
in
p.a.
and/orand/or in tonnes
in %tonnes
p.a.
XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

36 Please add other indicators (see “Other Sustainability Indicators” in chapter on Green Buildings) as applicable.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

44

Biodiversity
Illustrative Summary Template for Portfolio-based Report:

Protected areas/
OECM projects

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Projects
Financingb/

Project namef/currency%

e.g. Project 1

Allocated
Amountc/% of signed % of signed
amountamountcurrencykm²

per km²(bigger fauna)Landscapeconservation andrestoration projects

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Projects
Financingb/

Eligibility for Biodiversity
green bonds component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project
lifetimed/Project namef/currency%% of signed % of signed
amountamountcurrency

in years

XX

XX

XX

in years

XX

XX

XX

Project
lifetimed/Number of predefinedtarget or protectedorganisms/ species before
and after the project
Other Indicators

XXe.g. Project 1

3

Eligibility for Biodiversity
green bonds component

Maintenance/
safeguarding
increase7 ofprotected area/
OECM/ habitat

XX

XX

XX

XX

7

XX

XX

%

XX

XX

per m²(smallerfauna, flora)XX

Maintenance/
Increase of area undersafeguarding/certified land management
increase4 of(in bufferzones of protectednatural landscapeareas)
area

km²

XX

%

XX

km²

XX

%

XX

Number of
Changes
invading species
in the CO2,
and/ or area
nutrient and/occupied byor pH levels
invading species
for coastal
vegetation, and before and after
8
the projectcoral reefs%

per km²

Other
Indicators

per m²XX

e.g. number ofgame wardens/
rangers trainedin biodiversity
conservation etc

Number ofindigenous
species,flora or fauna
restoredthrough the
project

Annual GHG
emissions
reducede/

Other Indicators

absolute
numberin tonnes of CO2
equivalent

XX

XX

XX

XX

e.g. number offarmers trainedin sustainable
farming andbiodiversity etc.

3837 Issuers should specify if “maintenance”, “safeguarding” or “increase” applies.
38 Issuers are encouraged to provide additional information for coastal and marine areas, for example on maintenance and restoration of coastal vegetation like mangroves; the increase of health of coral reefs by reducing disease (degree of bleaching, age and size of living corals), as
well as by reducing the sedimentation rate, nutrients in water and direct human damage.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

45

Biodiversity (continued)
Illustrative Summary Template for Portfolio-based Report:

Protected areas/
OECM projects

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Projects
Financingb/

Portfolio namecurrency%

e.g. Portfolio 1

XX

XX

Landscapeconservation
and restoration
portfolios

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Projects
Financingb/

Portfolio namecurrency%

e.g. Portfolio 1

XX

XX

Eligibility for Biodiversity
green bonds component% of signed % of signed
amountamountXX

Maintenance/
safeguarding/increase9 ofprotected area/
OECM/ habitat

Number of predefinedtarget or protectedorganisms/ species before
and after the projectcurrency

in yearskm²

per km²(bigger fauna)XX

XX

Eligibility for Biodiversity
green bonds component

Allocated
Amountc/

Average
portfolio
lifetimed/% of signed % of signed
amountamountcurrency

in years

XX

XX

Allocated
Amountc/

Average
portfolio
lifetime
d/

XX

XX

XX

XX

%

XX

XX

per m²(smallerfauna, flora)XX

Maintenance/
Increase of area undersafeguarding/certified land management
increase4 of(in bufferzones of protectednatural landscapeareas)
area

km²

XX

%

XX

km²

XX

%

XX

ChangesNumber ofin the CO2,
invading species
and/ or area
nutrient and/occupied by
Other Indicatorsor pH levels
invading species
for coastal
vegetation, and before and after
the projectcoral reefs10%

per km²

per m²XX

e.g. number ofgame wardens/
rangers trainedin biodiversity
conservation etc

Number ofindigenous
species,flora or fauna
restoredthrough the
project

Annual GHG
emissions
reducede/

Other Indicators

absolute
numberin tonnes of CO2
equivalent

XX

XX

XX

XX

e.g. number offarmers trainedin sustainable
farming andbiodiversity etc.

39 40

39 Issuers should specify if “maintenance”, “safeguarding” or “increase” applies.
40 Issuers are encouraged to provide additional information for coastal and marine areas, for example on maintenance and restoration of coastal vegetation like mangroves; the increase of health of coral reefs by reducing disease (degree of bleaching, age and size of living corals), as
well as by reducing the sedimentation rate, nutrients in water and direct human damage.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

46

Climate Change Adaptation
Note: Recognising that qualitative impact information is especially important in the case of climate change adaptation/resilience projects, exemplary indicators are proposed inchapter IV.8 Adaptation instead of core indicators as in other chapters. Issuers are welcome to fill in the indicators relevant to their quantitative reporting when using below templates.
Illustrative Summary Template for Project-by-Project Report:
Climate change
adaptation/ resilience
projects

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Project
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Climate change
adaptation
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project
lifetimed/<Indicator x>
e.g.
Increase in grid resilience,
energy generation,transmission/
distribution and storage<Indicator y>e.g.
Reduction in the area
damaged by wildfires<Indicator z>
e.g.
Reduction in emergency
and unplanned rail andtarmac replacement-

Project namef/currency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amountcurrency

in years<unit x>in MWh<unit y>in km²<unit z>in km-e.g. Project 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

e.g. increased number ofhouseholds with access toresilient energy systems etc.

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Project
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Climate change
adaptation
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project
lifetimed/<Indicator x>
e.g.
Reduction in repair costs
due to storms<Indicator y>e.g.
Reduction in
the numberof customers/
employees suffering
loss of power /transport services<Indicator z>
e.g.
Reduction in thenumber of power lines
incapacitated due tostorms-Other Indicators

Project namef/currency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amountcurrency

in years<unit x>Valorised($/€/£ etc)

<unit y><unit z>-e.g. Project 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Temperaturerelated projects

Climate change
adaptation/ resilience
projects
Wind-related
projects

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

Other Indicators

e.g. increased number ofhouseholds with access toresilient energy systems etc.

47

Climate Change Adaptation (continued)
Illustrative Summary Template for Project-by-Project Report:
Climate change
adaptation/ resilience
projects<Indicator y>e.g.
<Indicator x>
Reduced/avoidede.g.
water loss/household
Reduction in flood damage
demand or increased
costs
water availability/
catchment<Indicator z>
e.g.
Reduction in land loss
from flooding/coastal
erosion-<unit y>in m³

<unit z>in km²

-

XX

XX

XX

XX

e.g. increased number ofhouseholds with access toresilient energy systems etc.

Project
lifetimed/<Indicator x>
e.g.
Reduction in repair costs
due to landslides<Indicator y>e.g.
Increase in area
under wetland
management/
drought resistantcrop farming<Indicator z>
e.g.
Reduction in changes in
the nutrient and/or pH
level for agricultural soils-

Other Indicators

currency

in years<unit x>Valorised($/€/£ etc)

<unit y>in km²/hectares<unit z>
in %

-

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Project
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Climate change
adaptation
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project
lifetimed/Project namef/currency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amountcurrency

in years<unit x>Valorised($/€/£ etc)

e.g. Project 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Project
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Climate change
adaptation
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Project namef/currency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amounte.g. Project 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

Water-related
projects

Climate change
adaptation/ resilience
projects
Land-related
projects

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

Other Indicators

e.g. increased number ofhouseholds with access toresilient energy systems etc.

48

Climate Change Adaptation (continued)
Illustrative Summary Template for Portfolio-based Report:
Climate change
adaptation/ resilience
projects

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Portfolio
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Climate change
adaptation
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Average
portfolio
lifetimed/<Indicator x>
e.g.
Increase in grid resilience,
energy generation,transmission/
distribution and storage<Indicator y>e.g.
Reduction in the area
damaged by wildfires<Indicator z>
e.g.
Reduction in emergency
and unplanned rail andtarmac replacement-

Portfolio namef/currency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amountcurrency

in years<unit x>in MWh<unit y>in km²<unit z>in km-e.g. Portfolio 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

e.g. increased number ofhouseholds with access toresilient energy systems etc.

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Portfolio
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Climate change
adaptation
component

Allocated
Amountc/

Average
portfolio
lifetimed/<Indicator x>
e.g.
Reduction in repair costs
due to storms (to all kindsof infrastructure andassets)<Indicator y>e.g.
Reduction in
the numberof customers/
employees suffering
loss of power /transport services<Indicator z>
e.g.
Reduction in thenumber of power lines
incapacitated due tostorms-Other Indicators

Portfolio namef/currency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amountcurrency

in years<unit x>Valorised($/€/£ etc)

<unit y><unit z>-e.g. Portfolio 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Temperaturerelated
portfolios

Climate change
adaptation/ resilience
projects
Wind-related
portfolios

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

Other Indicators

e.g. increased number ofhouseholds with access toresilient energy systems etc.

49

Climate Change Adaptation (continued)
Illustrative Summary Template for Portfolio-based Report:

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Portfolio
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Climate change
adaptation
component

Allocated
Amountc/<Indicator y>e.g.
Average<Indicator x>
Reduced/avoided
portfolioe.g.
water loss/household
lifetime Reduction in flood damage
demand or increasedd/costs - Valorised ($/€/£ etc)
water availability/
catchment

Portfolio namecurrency%% ofsignedamount% of signed
amountcurrency

in years<unit x>Valorised($/€/£ etc)

e.g. Porfolio 1

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

SignedAmounta/

Shareof Total
Portfolio
Financingb/

Eligibility
for green
bonds

Climate change
adaptation
component

Portfolio namecurrency%% ofsignedamounte.g. Portfolio 1

XX

XX

XX

Climate change
adaptation/ resilience
projects
Water-related
portfolios

Climate change
adaptation/ resilience
projects
Land-related
portfolios<Indicator z>
e.g.
Reduction in land loss
from flooding/coastal
erosion-<unit y>in m³

<unit z>in km²

-

XX

XX

XX

XX

e.g. increased number ofhouseholds with access toresilient energy systems etc.

Allocated
Amountc/

Average
portfolio
lifetimed/<Indicator x>
e.g.
Reduction in repair costs
due to landslides<Indicator y>e.g.
Increase in area
under wetland
management/
drought resistantcrop farming<Indicator z>
e.g.
Reduction in changes in
the nutrient and/or pH
level for agricultural soils-

Other Indicators% of signed
amountcurrency

in years<unit x>Valorised($/€/£ etc)

<unit y>in km²/ hectares<unit z>
in %

-

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

Other Indicators

e.g. increased number ofhouseholds with access toresilient energy systems etc.

50Notesa/	Signed amount represents the amount legally committed by the issuer for the project, a portfolio of projects
or component that is/are eligible for green bond financing.
b/	This is the share of the total project cost that is financed by the issuer. Issuers may also report the total projectcost. When aggre gating impact metrics only the pro-rated share should be included in the total.
c/	This represents the amount of green bond proceeds that has been allocated for disbursements to the project/portfolio.
d/	Based on either the expected economic life or financial life of the project(s), if applicable. Issuers should
disclose the reporting basis used.
e/	The methodology and assumptions used should be disclosed for calculations in quantitative reporting.
f/	Confidentiality considerations may restrict the project level detail that can be disclosed, but issuers should aim
to report the list of projects and either project level or aggregate level committed and allocated amounts andcore indicator amounts.

Handbook – Harmonized Framework for Impact Reporting

December 2020

51

Contact details
ICMA Paris Representative Office
62 rue la Boétie
75008 Paris
FranceTel: +33 1 70 17 64 70
greenbonds@icmagroup.org
www.icmagroup.org