1

Contents
1.

About GRI and the TNFD.......................................................................................... p3

2.

Objectives of the mapping and target audience ................................................... p4

3.

Key messages: alignment between the TNFD and GRI ....................................... p5

4.

Key messages: high-level differences between TNFD and GRI approaches .... p6

5.

How to read the mapping ....................................................................................... p12

2

1. About GRI and the TNFD
Since 2022, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial
Disclosures (TNFD) have worked closely together to exchange in the development of the TNFD
Recommendations and guidance, and the ongoing updates to the GRI Standards. This strong
collaboration has created a high level of consistency in the language, approach and definitionsin the GRI Standards and the TNFD Recommendations and guidance.
GRI is one of 20 knowledge partners from leading science, standards, and data bodies who
support the work of the TNFD and provided significant input to the development and design of
the TNFD Recommendations and additional guidance. The TNFD has provided extensive input,
as one of the peer reviewers, into the recently published GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024, which
increased alignment with the TNFD Recommendations.
In April 2024, the two organizations signaled their strengthened collaboration by announcing
plans for further implementation and capability building support. The TNFD-GRI
interoperability mapping is the first deliverable, providing a detailed overview of alignment
between the TNFD Disclosure Recommendations and metrics and the GRI Standards,
including GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 and relevant disclosures from the GRI Universal and Topic
Standards.
In addition to this mapping, the TNFD and GRI also announced to develop and publish
illustrative joint case studies and guidelines on the links between nature-related dependencies,
impacts, risks and opportunities.
GRI is an independent not-for-profit organization and standard setter that is the architect of thecommon global language used to assess and report on economic, environmental, and social
impacts. For over 25 years, GRI has led a global multi-stakeholder process to develop andrefine rigorous yet practical sustainability reporting. Using the GRI Standards, organizations
can understand and act on the full range of their impacts. GRI’s consistent, comparable andglobally applicable standards have become the world’s most widely used sustainability
reporting framework.
GRI is trusted by thousands of companies to provide the building blocks for transparent
reporting, managing risks and opportunities and supporting strategic decision-making. GRI
also provides tools and training that enable organizations of all sizes to harness the skills,
capabilities and data they need to create sustainable, long-term value and unlock positivechange in the world. On 25 January 2024, GRI published GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024, a majorrevision to its earlier Biodiversity Standard, which is aligned to the Recommendations of the
TNFD released in September 2023.
The TNFD was established to design and develop a global risk management and disclosure
framework for organizations to report and act on evolving nature-related issues, to informbetter decision-making by companies and capital providers, and ultimately contribute to a shift
in global financial flows away from nature-negative toward nature-positive outcomes. After two
years of design and development in partnership with knowledge partners and the benefit ofextensive consultation with market participants and other stakeholders, the TNFD launched its
final Recommendations in September 2023. Adoption of the TNFD framework by both real
economy companies and financial institutions is voluntary.
3

GRI and the TNFD recognize the importance of ongoing collaboration among sustainability
reporting initiatives to achieve broader consistency. This mapping exercise details theconsistency of the TNFD Recommendations and GRI Standards as a result of thosecollaborative efforts. In this spirit, both GRI and the TNFD are supporting the International
Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB)’s ongoing research into Biodiversity, Ecosystems andEcosystem Services.

2. Objectives of the mapping and target audience
This document provides insights, clarifications and instructions on the TNFD-GRI
interoperability mapping. The detailed mapping is published as an attachment in the form of atable of correspondences between the TNFD Disclosure Recommendations and metrics andthe disclosures of the GRI Standards, including but not limited to GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024.
The list of GRI Standards covered are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

GRI 1: Foundation 2021
GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021
GRI 3: Material Topics 2021
GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024
GRI 301: Materials 2016
GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018
GRI 305: Emissions 2016
GRI 306: Effluents and Waste 2016
GRI 306: Waste 2020
GRI 415: Public Policy 2016

Additionally, the tables provide a first mapping of the TNFD sector metrics and the relevant
GRI Sector Standards. This is shown with a correspondence table between the TNFD sector
metrics for metals and mining and the respective disclosures and recommendations in the GRISector Standards GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 and GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022. The metals andmining sector has been selected as GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024, the most recent Sector
Standard, has been developed using the latest GRI Biodiversity Standard (GRI 101). OtherGRI Sector Standards (including GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022) still include references to GRI 304:
Biodiversity 2016. These Sector Standards will be aligned with GRI 101 in due course, after
which the TNFD-GRI sector mapping is also expected to be updated.
Additional guidance to the TNFD Recommendations and to the GRI Standards is also taken
into consideration in the scope of this mapping. This includes the TNFD guidance on
identification and assessment of nature-related issues, known as the LEAP approach, as wellas GRI reporting recommendations (‘should’) and optional reporting (‘can’), which areencouraged or options but not required to report in accordance with the GRI Standards.
This work was undertaken in response to feedback received by both GRI and the TNFD frommarket participants about the need to support comparability of the TNFD’s recommended
disclosures and the GRI Standards to facilitate the work of preparers, the main target audienceof this document, who are planning to disclose on both.

4

The interoperability mapping aims to enhance understanding of the commonalities between
the GRI Standards and the TNFD Disclosure Recommendations and metrics. It can help
stakeholders identify which components of the GRI Standards contribute to meeting the TNFD
Recommendations and metrics and enable GRI report preparers who intend to makedisclosures aligned with the TNFD Recommendations to leverage their GRI reporting andreport anything additional that is not covered by the GRI Standards, as identified in the table.1
The mapping highlights differences and/or incrementality in what is recommended by the
TNFD with respect to the GRI, and conversely, in the GRI Standards with respect to the TNFD
Recommendations.

3. Key messages: alignment between the TNFD and GRI
The mapping underscores the high level of alignment achieved between the TNFD
Recommendations, metrics and guidance and the GRI Standards, including:•

The use of consistent nature-related concepts and definitions, including the five
direct drivers of nature and biodiversity loss, as defined by the Intergovernmental
Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES).

•

The reference and incorporation of the GRI materiality approach focusing on
impacts in the TNFD Recommendations and guidance, following the TNFD’s flexible
approach to materiality. The TNFD LEAP approach has been designed to helporganizations report in line with both impact materiality (following GRI) and financial
materiality (following the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) definition).
This reinforces how both the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) andGRI materiality approaches and standards can be used alongside each other,
consistently with the TNFD Recommendations.

•

All of the disclosures in GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 are reflected in the TNFD
Recommendations; and all of the TNFD Recommendations are reflected in the GRI
Standards, except those exclusively covering nature-related risk and opportunity
identification and assessment.2•

There is also strong consistency between the TNFD core global disclosure metrics
and the related metrics in the GRI Standards. A first mapping of TNFD sector metrics
and the relevant GRI Sector Standards also highlights this consistency at the sector
level.

•The TNFD LEAP approach – TNFD's suggested approach for identifying and assessing
nature-related issues – is referenced in GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 to identify where
impacts on biodiversity are most likely to be present and significant, as well as for
guidance on how to measure changes in the state of nature.

This correspondence will be relevant for companies choosing to report following an impact materiality approach,given the flexible approach to materiality of the TNFD.
2 Strategy C, Risk and Impact Management C and Metrics and Targets A.
1

5

•

GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 uses TNFD definitions and criteria when considering anorganization’s location in or near ecologically sensitive areas.

4. Key messages: high-level differences between TNFD and GRI
approaches
At a higher level than the more specific differences between datapoints, the mapping also
identifies some broader concepts on which the TNFD Recommendations and metrics and the
GRI Standards may differ. These high-level differences should be considered by report
preparers when moving from one reporting framework to the other.
These differences are summarized in Table 1, which provides a side-by-side comparison of
the approaches and definitions used by TNFD and GRI, respectively. These differences arealso provided in the mapping table, as a comment at the beginning of each relevant TNFD
disclosure pillar as part of the tab ‘TNFD Recommendations – GRI’.

6

Table 1: High-level comparison of differences in TNFD and GRI reporting approaches
Topic
Issues coveredand scope

TNFD approach

GRI approach

Relevant TNFD / GRI
reference

The material information to be disclosed inalignment with the TNFD Recommendations
and metrics includes nature-related
dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities.

The GRI Standards focus on impacts, not on
dependencies, risks and opportunities. They
are not specific to nature-related impacts
only, but cover impacts on the economy,
environment, and people.

TNFD
Recommendations,
Section 2 –Foundations forunderstanding natureand business

The TNFD covers all four realms of nature(land, ocean, freshwater and atmosphere),across which ‘biodiversity’ refers to thevariability among living organisms.
The TNFD’s concepts and definitions recognizethat nature includes people, and that healthy
ecosystems are a prerequisite for the sustained
flow of ecosystem services that communities
need to survive and flourish.

When using the GRI Standards, theorganization reports on the topics that
represent its most significant impacts on theeconomy, environment, and people, including
impacts on their human rights. These are theorganization’s material topics.
GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 focuses on the topic
of biodiversity. The GRI Standards also coverother nature-related topics, such as water andeffluents and waste, and a broad range of othertopics, such as anti-corruption, tax,
employment, and forced or compulsory labor.

GRI 1: Foundation 2021
– Section 2 Key
concepts
GRI 3: Material Topics
2021 – Section 1
Guidance to determinematerial topics
GRI 101: Biodiversity
2024

While the GRI Standards do not directly
address an organization's dependencies on
biodiversity, they are covered to an extent in
GRI 101 when an organization affects theenvironmental assets and ecosystem services it
depends on.

7

TopicApplication ofmateriality

Value chain

TNFD approach

GRI approach

The TNFD presents a flexible materiality
approach, recommending that report preparers
use ISSB’s definition of material information(‘financial materiality’) as a baseline and an‘impact materiality’ definition in addition, should
they choose or need to do so, referencing the
GRI materiality approach focusing on impacts.

The GRI Standards’ materiality approach
focuses on impacts, enabling organizations toreport on their most significant impacts on theeconomy, environment, and people. The GRI
Standards define material topics as topics that
represent the organization’s most significant
impacts on the economy, environment, andpeople, including impacts on their humanrights.

TNFD General
Requirement 1 –Application ofmateriality

The TNFD asks companies to describe thescope of their nature-related assessment anddisclosures and the process followed indetermining that scope. This should include
activities and assets in the organization’s direct
operations and upstream and downstream
value chain(s).

Similarly, the GRI Standards cover anorganization’s full value chain. For the topic of
biodiversity, the disclosures in GRI 101:
Biodiversity 2024 set the reporting
expectations for the organization and its
upstream and downstream value chain.

TNFD General
Requirement 2 – Scopeof disclosures

The GRI Standards cover impacts originated asa result of the organization's activities orbusiness relationships. This means that theterm 'impacts' in the GRI Standards refers to anorganization's impacts across the value chain(unless specified otherwise).

GRI 1: Foundation 2021
– Section 2 Key
concepts

The TNFD Recommendations clarify thatorganizations should identify, assess anddisclose the material nature-related issues intheir upstream and downstream value chains,
as and when possible, recognizing that thismight take some time, given data and capacity
limitations.

Relevant TNFD / GRI
reference

GRI 3: Material Topics
2021 – Section 1
Guidance to determinematerial topics

TNFD Guidance onvalue chains

GRI 101: Biodiversity2024

GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 includes
requirements and recommendations forreporting information on the products andservices in the supply chain with the mostsignificant impacts on biodiversity. GRI 101 also
includes recommendations and options to8TopicLocation of naturerelated issues

TNFD approach

The TNFD states that consideration of thegeographic location of the organization’s
interfaces with nature should be central to theorganization’s assessment of its nature-related
issues, and where material, to its disclosurestatements.
The TNFD sets out that dependency and impact
metrics should be reported by material
dependency and impact as identified in TNFD
recommended disclosure Strategy A, and also
include the location in which the impact driveroccurs, with reference to Strategy D.
When disclosing information about material
nature-related issues by geographic location,
the organization should disaggregate
information to the extent possible.
Organizations are encouraged to improve thelevel of geolocation precision over time as data
and traceability improve. However,organizations should not aggregate ordisaggregate locations where doing so would
obscure material information.
The TNFD recommends organizations disclose
assets/and or activities that meet the criteria for'priority locations' which includes both:

GRI approachreport the information for entities downstream
in its value chain, if available.
Most disclosures in GRI 101 focus on theorganization’s sites with the most significant
impacts on biodiversity. GRI 101 also
requires reporting whether these sites are inor near (rather than only in) an ecologicallysensitive area. In GRI 101, information on anorganization’s sites with no significant
impacts on biodiversity do not need to bereported, even if these sites are in or near an
ecologically sensitive area.

Relevant TNFD / GRI
reference

TNFD General
Requirement 3 –Location
TNFD Recommended
Disclosure Strategy D
GRI 101: Biodiversity
2024

Impacts on biodiversity are location-specific.
An understanding of the local context where anorganization interacts with biodiversity isnecessary to identify and assess its impacts.
Disclosure 101-5 requires specific informationon the location and size of the organization’ssites with the most significant impacts on
biodiversity. Disclosures 101-6 to 101-8 require
information on impacts for each site reported
under Disclosure 101-5. For the supply chain,
GRI 101 requires information at country or
jurisdiction-level.
GRI 101 and the TNFD are aligned in requiring
disclosure of sites with the most significant
impacts on biodiversity.

9TopicTNFD approach•‘material locations’ where anorganization has identified material
nature-related dependencies, impacts,
risks and opportunities in its direct
operations and upstream anddownstream value chain(s); and‘Sensitive locations’ where the assets
and/or activities interface with nature in:o Areas important for biodiversity;
and/oro Areas of high ecosystem integrity;
and/oro Areas of rapid decline inecosystem integrity; and/oro Areas of high physical water risks;
and/oro Areas of importance forecosystem service provision,
including benefits to Indigenous
Peoples, Local Communities andstakeholders.

GRI 101 uses the same criteria as the TNFD for
identifying ecologically sensitive areas.

The TNFD identifies stakeholders as persons orgroups who are directly or indirectly affected bya project. This also includes those who are notaffected but who may have interests in a project
and/or the ability to influence its outcome.

Similarly, the GRI Standards define
stakeholders as individuals or groups that haveinterests that are affected or could be affectedby the organization’s activities.
However, Disclosure 2-29 Approach to
stakeholder engagement in
GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 anddisclosures in GRI 101 focus more generally•

Engagement with
Indigenous
Peoples, Local
Communities andaffectedstakeholders

GRI approach

The TNFD recommends disclosure ofengagement with affected stakeholders, which

Relevant TNFD / GRI
reference

TNFD General
Requirement 6 Engagement with
Indigenous Peoples,
Local
Communities andaffected stakeholders

10TopicTNFD approach

GRI approach

includes people or groups that have been, or
may be, affected by an organization’s
operations, products, services and value
chains.

on engagement with these stakeholders,which can include local communities andvulnerable groups, among which GRI
includes Indigenous Peoples.

The TNFD specifies that this includes thoseaffected by an organization’s nature-related
dependencies, impacts, risks and/or
opportunities, and responses to those issues.
Affected stakeholders can include affected
communities and Indigenous Peoples and Local
Communities (IPLCs). However, in its general
requirements and Disclosure Recommendation
Governance C, the TNFD recommends
disclosure of information about engagementwith IPLCs regardless of whether they havebeen or may be affected.

Definitions of stakeholder, local community, andIndigenous Peoples can be found in the GRI
Standards Glossary.

Relevant TNFD / GRI
reference
TNFD additional
guidance on
engagement with
Indigenous Peoples,
Local Communities andaffected stakeholders
GRI 2: General
Disclosures 2021Disclosure 2-29
Approach to
stakeholder
engagement
GRI 101: Biodiversity
2024

The TNFD has developed additional guidanceon engagement by companies and financial
institutions with IPLCs and affectedstakeholders for the assessment, managementand disclosure of nature-related dependencies,
impacts, risks and opportunities. Definitions ofstakeholders, affected stakeholders, affected
communities, Indigenous Peoples and Local
Communities can be found in the TNFD
glossary.

11

5. How to read the mapping
The correspondence table illustrates for each TNFD data point the corresponding data pointin the GRI Standards. The table also illustrates for nature-related GRI data points thecorresponding data point in the TNFD Disclosure Recommendations and metrics.
The table is divided into four sections or tabs:
1. TNFD Recommendations – GRI: assists reporters in understanding how the
information reported in line with the GRI Standards can be used to report in line with
the TNFD recommended disclosures;
2. TNFD core global metrics – GRI: assists reporters in understanding how the
information reported in line with the GRI Standards can be used to report in line with
the TNFD core disclosure indicators and metrics;
3. GRI Standards – TNFD: assists reporters in understanding how the information
reported in line with the TNFD Recommendations and core disclosure metrics can beused to report in line with the GRI Standards; and4. TNFD Metals & Mining – GRI: assists reporters in understanding how the information
reported in line with the TNFD core sector metrics for metals and mining can be used
to report in line with the GRI Standards.
The 'Comment' column at the end of all tabs summarizes key differences that arise at data
point level. The notes are not exhaustive.
The following definitions are identified for the categories of differences in the mapping:•Difference in semantics: Difference in the terminology or wording used, which could
require minor adjustments or additions in the disclosure in order to align with thespecific TNFD Recommendation or metric (for tabs 1, 2 and 4) / GRI requirement (fortab 3).

•

Difference in scope: Difference in the scope of the disclosure and the extent of
information to be disclosed, requiring the disclosure of additional information in order
to align with the specific TNFD Recommendation or metric (for tabs 1, 2 and 4) / GRI
requirement (for tab 3).

•

Difference in granularity: Difference in the breakdown to be disclosed, requiring
more or a different level of granularity in the disclosure in order to align with thespecific TNFD Recommendation or metric (for tabs 1, 2 and 4) / GRI requirement (fortab 3).

•

Difference in units: Difference in the units of measure to be used for disclosure of
metrics, requiring a conversion to other units in order to align with the specific TNFD
Recommendation or metric (for tabs 1, 2 and 4) / GRI requirement (for tab 3).

12•

Difference in presentation: Difference in the way the information is presented forreporting purposes, requiring a conversion from qualitative to quantitative information(or vice versa) in order to align with the specific TNFD Recommendation or metric(for tabs 1, 2 and 4) / GRI requirement (for tab 3).

13

14

Published July 202415