Global
Reporting Initiative (GRI)
ISSUES: Developing
consensus on a global framework for corporate environmental/sustainability
reporting. Multi stakeholder perspectives.
GOALS: To develop and
disseminate globally applicable sustainability reporting guidelines for
voluntary use by organisations reporting on the economic, environmental and
social dimensions of their activities, products and services. GRI is a
long-term, multi-stakeholder, international undertaking, focused on
corporate sector, with possible extensions to other organisation types in future
e.g. local municipalities, NGO’s
PARTICIPATING STAKEHOLDERS: The Coalition for Environmentally
Responsible Economies (CERES); NGO’s;
accountants; business; international organisations such as UNEP
TIME FRAME: Initiated in
late 1997, ongoing, developing process
MSP
CONTACT DETAILS; URL: www.globalreporting.org
Classification:
Type:
Informing; for the purpose of Implementation & Monitoring: A process in
steps: stewardship (consolidation), tools (identification issues) to application
(use and implementation).
Level:
International/national
Procedural Aspects:
Designing the MSP
The
Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies (CERES), in collaboration
with the Tellus Institute, convened the GRI in late 1997.
(CERES is the coalition of environmentally concerned groups that sponsors
the 10 point CERES principles). UNEP then joined as a key partner.
Encouragement
was given to others to become part of the process.
GRI
has two main components:
-
Developing
a multi-stakeholder, global consultation processes based on the principles
of transparency and inclusiveness
-
Development
and dissemination of GRI’s Sustainability Reporting Guidelines.
The
process for the initiative was fairly organic. Initially, an informal group of
like-minded people developed the concept, then a more formal group was set up
(also involving new individuals) as a Steering Committee (SC) to develop the
Mission Statement. The SC has membership from 7 countries and 17 organisations
and has guided GRI to date. The statement was open to comment and change for
others outside the SC. Now it is fairly defined, although it is still open to
change. The core principle is to allow anyone interested and committed to the
process to participate i.e. no stakeholder is being excluded. Also, if a party
should decide not to participate then they can still receive regular up-dates
and reports on the process for purposes of transparency and openness.
The
opportunity for GRI arose in response to rising expectations for greater
corporate accountability, transparency and encouragement for more companies to
move towards sustainability reporting (as opposed to just financial reports).
Identifying the issues to be addressed in an MSP
CERES
identified potential SC members to kick-start the process. The Steering
Committee had the initial idea and then widened discussion.
GRI
Meetings were held in more than 15 countries – 35 countries involved so far.
GRI process developed through Working Groups, Briefings, Conferences and
Communications. GRI’s Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, were released in a
draft format in March 1999, and opened to comments and testing. The Revised
Guidelines released in June 2000 were developed with the help of representatives
from business, NGOs and governments across the world.
Identifying relevant stakeholders
Process
of identification began informally, then through more coordinated structure
(Steering Committee). Then built allies e.g. John Elkington (Sustainability),
Roger Adams ACCA (UK accountants association. They started to develop working
groups and programmes. The SC meeting quarterly and then less frequent “open
meetings” are held to identify the focus of a working group e.g. Social
Development Indicators.
Governments,
NGOs, businesses, business associations, labour organisations and human rights
groups involved to date.
Identifying MSP participants
The
GRI is open to all individuals and organisations interested in sustainability
reporting. Particular targeting of multi-national corporations in this phase.
GRI clearly states that it will not form formal alliances, partnerships or
ventures with commercial firms.
21
companies pilot tested the draft guidelines, published in 1999 – about half
volunteered and the rest were recruited after the gaps became obvious. Selected
on the basis of various criteria e.g. geographical balance, diversity in size,
reporting experience etc.
Many
other stakeholders - corporate and non-corporate - provided feedback. Several
companies have already published GRI Reports.
Setting
the goals of an MSP
The
GRI Steering Group in partnership with stakeholders has guided developments so
far. The vision aims to move, over time, from an informing process to one that
brings together disparate reporting initiatives into a new multi-stakeholder,
global process, with ramifications for disclosure, investment and business
responsibility.
Set
out in Mission statement (defined by SC) and refined through consultation,
through process on on-going dialogue and consultation (largely via internet and
email).
Setting the agenda
GRI
in collaboration with stakeholders. An open process so checking back is
possible.
Process
in steps: stewardship (consolidation), tools (identification issues) to
application (use and implementation). Set by SC and open meeting.
Setting the time-table
Process
is on-going. This band of activities will finish 2002. Timing led by SC,
Secretariat and Transitions Director.
Preparatory process
GRI
describe the process as intensive, multi-stakeholder, and international. As well
as input from business and governments, the June 2000 release benefited from the
thinking of labour organisations, human rights, environmental, and investor
groups.
GRI
identifies initiatives, invites them into the process and tries to find common
elements across the programmes.
GRI
optimises use of email, regional meetings and video conferences to ensure a
top-down, bottom-up balance. It uses the Internet for grass-roots and NGO
monitoring and feedback.
People
are involved more as a personal capacity and less on behalf of organisations,
therefore consultation is less relevant and anyone can be involved. However,
where contentious issues arise then people can go away and assess.
Communication process
Extensive
use of electronic reporting to facilitate dialogue dissemination.
Email,
meetings, conferences, international symposium e.g. Washington. The process
seeks to be neutral as far as possible and level discussion. Careful and strong
chairing in a meeting is essential. The GRI offers an opportunity to NGOs to
deliver their message through to industry and government actors. GRI view the
process as one which enhances and disseminates the Guidelines through ongoing
consultation and stakeholder engagement.
Decision-making process: procedures of agreement
Agreement
is sought through working groups, careful wording and clarification of
definitions is often necessary. Groups work by consensus, not majority.
Implementation process
The
Guidelines will be a useful resource to any company wishing to use them. They
were described by Roger Adams of the Association of Chartered Certified
Accountants as “a major step towards a generally accepted, global framework
for sustainability reporting” (DETR 2001).
The
test of whether the GRI succeeds in improving quality of company reporting will
depend upon the number of companies adopting the guidelines.
The
process is constantly redefined (this is an integral part of GRI process) and
redesigned, through an iterative, open process (along model of software
development i.e. version 1.0, 2.0 etc.).
Closing the MSP
Process
is still in its early stages. The guidelines will be further tested and refined.
Work is to be done on strengthening and increasing stakeholder engagement. SC
decides with open meeting consultation.
Structural Aspects:
Structures / institutions of the MSP
SC,
secretariat, working groups, open forum (largely internet based). The interim
Steering Committee reflects GRI’s multi-disciplinary and international
dimension. Set up in early 1998 and currently based in Boston, USA. Efforts
underway to build a permanent GRI institution, governed by a Board of Directors
and involving multi-party technical and stakeholder groups to ensure
continuation of GRI’s core values of inclusiveness and transparency.
Facilitation
GRI
Secretariat, in partnership with CERES (GRI base) and UNEP. Offers research,
meeting, drafting, coordination services.
Documentation
There
is extensive use of the Internet; reports, frameworks etc. are being produced,
e.g. first draft of GRI guidelines in 2000.
Relating to not-participating stakeholders
The
June 2000 release of GRI’s Sustainability Reporting Guidelines attracted
widespread attention. Guidelines can be used by any relevant institutions. For
example, the UK Department of Trade and Industry is currently seeking
independent advice on the feasibility of their reporting against the GRI
Guidelines.
GRI
now working to strengthen stakeholder engagement. They receive info, can comment
and input at any opportunity.
Relating to the general public
GRI
is not really a public forum but the process is open to comments from relevant
individuals. Information is available via the Internet.
GRI
Guidelines provide reporters and users of reports with guidance on reporting
principles and recommendations for report content. They also include indicators
covering the “ triple bottom line” issues - environmental, social and
economic issues which will make it easier for users of reports, such as
investors, to compare performance across organisations.
Information
is available through brochure, internet, and press.
Linkage into official decision-making process
GRI
is a voluntary initiative and a non-governmental process. The
agreed principle initially was that government involvement at a too early stage
could slow down the process and be potentially hazardous. Now, however,
government interest is growing and GRI is often consulted in other processes,
e.g. EU Disclosure guidelines, OECD equivalent, ISO, UNEP GC, UN, ILO, High
Commission Human Rights. GRI is assisting processes of standard reporting.
Funding
GRI
is funded mainly by foundations including United Nations Foundation, Ford
Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, CS Mott Foundation, as well as Spencor T Oil
(US), the US Environmental Protection Agency, one Danish funder (undeclared). A
business plan to secure future growth is underway. Independence is an issue.
Budget is around US$ 3-4 million for the first three years. Requirements will
grow to US$ 4-5 million per year. Proposal in the future is to create a trust,
ensuring transparency. Funders will have no control or influence over the
distribution of their funds.
[ information gathered as of 16 February 2001 ]
