Barbara Strozzilaan 336
1083 HN Amsterdam
The Netherlands
gssbsecretariat@globalreporting.org

GSSB Summary of the virtual
meeting held on 19 November 2020
Approved by the GSSB on 10 December 2020

© GRI 2020

1

Contents
Participants.............................................................................................................................................. 3
List of abbreviations ................................................................................................................................ 3
Decisions and action items ..................................................................................................................... 4
Session 1: Welcome ............................................................................................................................... 4
Session 2: GSSB Work Program update ................................................................................................ 4
Session 3: GRI Universal Standards Project update .............................................................................. 5
Session 4: Any other business and close of meeting ............................................................................. 8

Page 2 of 82Participants

3Present:

456NameConstituency

Judy Kuszewski

Chair

Robyn Leeson

Vice-Chair

Loredana Carta

LaborPeter Colley

Labor

Evan Harvey

Investment institution

Kirsten Margrethe Hovi

Business enterpriseRama Krishnan Venkateswaran

Investment institution [left meeting early]

Joseph Martin

Business enterprise

Tung-Li (Tony) Mo

Civil society organization

Jennifer Princing

Business enterprise

Corli le RouxMediating institution

Gustavo SinnerMediating institution

Kenton Swift

Civil society organization

Michel Washer

Business enterprise

Apologies:NameConstituency

Vincent Kong

Business enterprise

In attendance from GRI:
NamePosition

Bastian Buck

Chief of Standards

Anna Krotova

Senior Manager

Miguel Pérez Ludeña

Research Lead Sector Program

List of abbreviations
GSSB
HGBSD

Global Sustainability Standards Board
Highest governance bodyStandards Division

Page 3 of 8

7Decisions and action items

8Decisions

9GSSB Decision 2020.21 The GSSB resolved to approve Item 01–Draft summary of the GSSB

10

meeting held on 22 October 2020.

11GSSB Decision 2020.22 The GSSB resolved to approve Item 02 – GRI Sector Standards Program –12

Revised list of prioritized sectors.

13GSSB Decision 2020.23 The GSSB resolved to approve Item 03 – GSSB Work Program 2020-2022.

14Action items
Standards Division
Session 3•

SD to implement its proposals for further action
regarding the statement of use.

•SD to consult GSSB labor constituency members toclarify public comment feedback on ACT-2 and SE-2
and further investigate duplication of content in GRI
102.

15

Session 1: Welcome

16

The GSSB was presented with Item 01 – Draft summary of the GSSB meeting held on 22 October

172020 for approval.

18

GSSB Chair Judy Kuszewski (henceforth the Chair) welcomed the GSSB and presented an overview

19of the meeting agenda.

20

GSSB Decision 2020.21 The GSSB resolved to approve Item 01 – Draft summary of the GSSB

21

meeting held on 22 October 2020.

22

Session 2: GSSB Work Program

23

updatePage 4 of 8

24

The GSSB was presented with Item 02 – GRI Sector Standards Program – Revised list of prioritized25

sectors and Item 03 – GSSB Work Program 2020-2022 for approval.

26

GSSB Decision 2020.22 The GSSB resolved to approve Item 02 – GRI Sector Standards Program –27

Revised list of prioritized sectors.

28

GSSB Decision 2020.23 The GSSB resolved to approve Item 03 – GSSB Work Program 2020-2022.

29

Session 3: GRI Universal Standards

30

Project update

31

The GSSB was presented with Item 04 – Public comments on the Statement of Use in the Universal

32Standards exposure draft and Item 05 – Public comments on GRI 102: About the Organization in the33

Universal Standards exposure draft for information.

34

Statement of use

35

The Standards Division (SD) presented the GSSB with an overview of the public comment feedback36

in response to the statement of use and provided proposals on how to address this feedback.

37

The SD proposed to retain the requirement to provide a statement of use in the GRI content index,

38

with amendments made in view of considerations raised in the public comments. In this respect, the39

SD proposed to explore wording that will maintain reference to the responsibility of the organization40

for reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards. The SD also proposed to explore overlaps with41

governance requirements, and to reflect any relevant overlap in the statement of use or in the42accompanying guidance. The SD further proposed either examining options to incorporate wording

43

acknowledging the quality and veracity of reported information directly in the statement of use, or

44revising section 5 of GRI 101 to take into account concerns regarding external assurance in45

enhancing the credibility of sustainability reporting.

46

A number of GSSB members responded to public concern regarding differences between financial

47

reporting and sustainability reporting. In financial reporting, the highest governance body (HGB) or48

senior executives sign off on audited information, which is subject to extensive controls and49

governance, whereas in sustainability reporting such information is unaudited. One GSSB member

50

commented that audits and controls for sustainability reporting would have to be developed

51

extensively to reach this level. Another GSSB member made the point that many of the indicators

52

reported in sustainability reporting are impacts in the value chain and are not measured or computed;

53

this would mean requiring boards to commit on the veracity of data that is not calculated with the54same accuracy as financial statements, and on impacts not within the organization’s own scope of55

activity.

Page 5 of 8

56

One GSSB member further expressed the concern that requiring boards of directors to sign off on

57

information about which there is so much uncertainty runs the risk of boards reporting only what is58

statutorily required. Another GSSB member commented on the danger of the statement of use

59

appearing more as a disclaimer than a statement.

60

The Chair acknowledged that if the GSSB were to consider changing requirements, it must be61

confident of the wider systems of support, such as in assurance and appropriate governance62

methodologies, available to implement the changes. In some cases, these systems of support need to63

be developed.

64

One GSSB member commented that a sign-off by the HGB or senior executives pertained only to65

companies reporting in accordance with GRI Standards, and queried its impact in the US. The

66

member further commented that such a requirement would discourage organizations reporting in

67

accordance with GRI Standards.

68

The SD replied that while there is a regional bias in reporting preferences; present data indicates that69

globally the majority (80%) of reporters used one of the current ‘in accordance’ options (Core or70

Comprehensive), and that reporting using these options is growing in the US. The SD further

71

commented that changes to the GRI Standards should be seen in the light of more stringent

72

regulation arising in multiple jurisdictions regarding mandating sustainability reporting.

73

One GSSB member commented that at a time when governments and other regulators are looking for

74

improved standards and compliance frameworks, it is necessary to ensure that the HGB or senior

75

executives take responsibility for disclosures in a sustainability report. One way to effect this is76

through due diligence, indicating that an organization has made best endeavors to comply with the77GRI Standards. The member also identified a tension between desiring an improvement in the quality

78

of reporting and aspiring to increase the number of organizations reporting.

79

One GSSB member cautioned that while many organizations will be considering sustainable ways of80

operating as they rebuild after COVID-19, it will be challenging for them to adopt more stringent

81

methods of non-financial reporting to their sustainability reporting. The member added that provision82

for third-party assurance already exists in the current GRI Standards, and that requiring assurance for83

quality and veracity in the present climate is excessive.

84

A number of members commented favorably on streamlining reporting options from three (with85reference to, Core, and Comprehensive) to two (with reference to, and in accordance with). One

86member added that this and the inclusion of reasons for omission for not reporting material topics

87

would encourage companies to report in accordance.

88

One GSSB member sought clarification as to whether the SD’s proposal to explore the wording in the89

statement of use regarding reference to the responsibility of the organization for reporting in90

accordance with the GRI Standards refers to the HGB and higher management, or to the organization

91

generally.

Page 6 of 8

92

The SD proposed to explore wording for the statement to maintain responsibility of the organization,93

but, following public feedback, to detach this from responsibility of the HGB or senior management.

94

The GSSB member was opposed to decoupling the statement of use from the HGB entirely, and,95

while acknowledging practical issues in this respect, expressed the opinion that the SD should

96

explore what is practically possible in terms of retaining the importance of the HGB in overseeing and97

being accountable for what is disclosed to stakeholders.

98

The Chair sought clarification on the SD’s proposal to explore overlaps with governance requirements

99

and inquired whether this had to do with concerns raised by some respondents that reporting is a100

delegated activity, so not considered to be the purview of the HGB.

101

The SD confirmed this and explained that GRI Standards already include disclosures on how this102

process is set up within an organization. The SD further explained that GRI Standards are used in103

more than 90 countries, with a wide range of jurisdictions regarding governance. It is necessary to104

indicate that the organization stands behind the statement, and to relate who has made the105

statement. The SD proposed to examine ways to elaborate this information either in the statement106

itself or in the guidance and welcomed guidance from the GSSB.

107

One GSSB member commented that it would be helpful for the GSSB to consider practical solutions,108

and suggested that the SD present the GSSB with a spectrum, based on the public feedback, that

109

reflects an incremental shift from the current sign-off to a highest option that includes a sign-off on

110

quality, with several options in between, along with their implications and challenges.

111

The SD recognized the GSSB’s present caution regarding the inclusion of an acknowledgement of

112

quality and veracity in the statement of use, and explained its alternative proposal regarding creating

113

a stronger link between recommendations on enhancing the credibility of sustainability reporting and114

the statement of use, as well as creating a stronger link to external assurance.

115

The Chair reiterated a concern that reliance on external assurance may mean that the community of116

global reporting organizations would be in the hands of the entirely separate sustainability assurance

117

industry, and that this would require engagement with that industry in order to reach a solution.

118

The SD confirmed that it would explore the options it had presented to the GSSB.

119

GRI 102: About the organization

120

The SD presented the GSSB with an overview of the public comment feedback and key issues

121

identified regarding GRI 102, focusing primarily on those relating to governance disclosures.

122

One GSSB member expressed concern about the large amount of negative feedback regarding

123

governance disclosures on remuneration.

124

Another GSSB member commented that governance disclosures on renumeration had not been125

altered in the exposure draft, simply rearranged, and that negative feedback on these disclosures was

126

common, given the broad range of organizations involved. A GSSB member emphasized the127

International Corporate Governance Network’s comment that rather than the remuneration ratio being

Page 7 of 8128

to workers within the organization, that it be to median wages in the country, which is more129

meaningful to users.

130

The GSSB labor constituency members agreed to support the SD with further clarifying feedback

131

received in response to collective bargaining and workers who are not employees (ACT-2 and SE-2).

132

Actions133•

SD to implement its proposals for further action regarding the statement of use.

134

•SD to consult GSSB labor constituency members to clarify public comment feedback on ACT-135

2 and SE-2 and further investigate duplication of content in GRI 102.

136

Session 4: Any other business and137

close of meeting

138

No other business was raised, and the Chair closed the meeting at 15.00 CET (Central European139

Time).

Page 8 of 8