By Katherine Miles Hill

Business leaders behind many of the world’s leading brands have long been convinced of the benefits of sustainability reporting.

80% of the top 15 Business Week global brands issue sustainability reports based on the Global Reporting Initiative Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, and more than 1000 organizations have declared their voluntary adoption of the Guidelines worldwide. The case is different in China where the majority of companies hasn’t heard of the concept, doesn’t understand its benefits, and certainly doesn’t yet know about the GRI Guidelines. But things are changing. China, famous for its exports, has recently imported the idea.

Sustainability reporting is a relatively new notion for businesses. It is sometimes also called triple bottom line, non-financial, or corporate social responsibility reporting and it refers to organizations formally disclosing information on their social, environmental and economic performance.

This type of reporting emerged in the late nineties in the US and Europe, in response to demands by external stakeholders (such as communities, non-governmental organizations, and consumers) for greater accountability and transparency by companies on issues affecting them. At the same time, internal forces (such as employees, investors, senior management) within organizations were also beginning to recognize the value of sustainability reporting and the business case behind it. More recently the global policy debate around sustainability issues has reinforced the need for companies to use sustainability reporting to communicate their progress towards reducing their social, economic and environmental impacts, and innovating around new opportunities provided by a commitment to a more sustainable future.

While the concept of sustainability reporting surfaced 10 years ago, in China sustainability reporting is in its infancy but steadily growing. A study on sustainability reporting in China by SynTao found that 18 enterprises published reports in 2006, three times the number published in 2005. External stakeholders including foreign investors have been pressuring companies to disclose their sustainability performance. Within China, the Central Development and Reform Committee and the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges have urged state owned enterprises and listed companies to publish a sustainability report.

The latest environment incidents and product safety scandals involving Chinese companies have also shifted the attention within the business community to begin managing these risks. They are beginning to identify both internal and external benefits of moving towards sustainable business models and reporting is an important element of these newly emerging management systems.

More companies recognize that the process of producing reports enables them to internally identify operational shortcomings, inefficiencies, and potential risks, which is the first step towards their resolution and mitigation. Gathering sustainability information appeals to budget holders who look to save money in order to deliver shareholder value. Information gathered through this process also facilitates the benchmarking of company performance. This information can be used as an internal management tool, but also externally to bring brand and reputation benefits.

Risk disclosure and transparency builds customer confidence in a company’s brand, products and services. It gives companies a competitive edge - some businesses even attribute increases in their market share and increased profits to their approach to sustainability. It can also improve a company’s access to capital because the investment community trusts companies who openly present sustainability information. While other companies in China are involved in product recalls due to safety concerns, promoting sustainable credentials is a way for other companies to differentiate their business proposition. In the global market place sustainability reporting is a way to convince consumers, regulators and investors that Chinese companies uphold the same values as their US and European counterparts. It can be a tool to fix the damaged “Made in China” brand.

As the benefits of sustainability reporting have become more widely recognized, and with growing numbers of reporting companies worldwide, a framework for reporting has become a necessity. The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), a multi stakeholder network and a collaborating centre of the United Nations Environment Programme, has pioneered a global sustainability reporting framework. At the heart of the Framework lie the Sustainability Reporting Guidelines – first issued in 2000, then 2002, and finally the third iteration (G3 Guidelines) were released in 2006. These Guidelines facilitate transparency and comparability among companies that use it.

In addition, to the universally applicable core Guidelines the framework contains Sector Supplements which contain specialized reporting guidance for companies in various industry sectors – such as mining and metals, automotive, and retail and apparel, in response to the unique sustainability challenges they face. To date more than 1000 organizations, including many of the worlds leading brands, have declared their voluntary adoption of the Guidelines. Consequently the G3 Guidelines have become the de facto global standard for reporting.

But who gives GRI the authority to set these standards? The Guidelines and Sector Supplements are produced through a consensus-seeking process with stakeholders drawn globally from business, civil society, labor, and professional institutions. So it is not GRI itself who sets the standards, rather a cross section of global stakeholders who share the vision that reporting on economic, environmental, and social performance by all organizations should become as routine and comparable as financial reporting. GRI’s role is as a convener of this process. GRI facilitates consensus among geographically and sector representative groups with various levels of reporting expertise. These groups convene to develop the various elements of the reporting framework. Their work also must undergo a public comment process, and eventually be approved by the various governance bodies, including the Board of Directors and the Technical Advisory Committee, that oversee the GRI and its due process.

The resultant G3 Guidelines are a free global public good and have been translated into many languages including Mandarin. The G3 Guidelines are exactly that, guidelines to help organizations identify which indicators they should be reporting on. For companies new to reporting, the best place to start is seeing whether data is already being collected on any of the recommended indicators. Initially, prioritize which indicators meet the disclosure requirements demanded by stakeholders interested and most relevant to the sector.

It is evident that there is a change in the thinking about how business is conducted in China. Just as in other parts of the world, as businesses recognize the benefits of disclosing their sustainability performance especially to strengthen the “Made in China” brand; reporting is only going to gain in popularity in the country. As companies voluntarily start to report this information, the GRI G3 Guidelines provide the best place to begin this process.

The G3 Guidelines can be accessed free of charge in English and Mandarin, as well as other languages, via the GRI web portal www.globalreporting.org. Hard copies of the G3 Guidelines can also be ordered on line at cost price plus postage and packing.

Katherine Miles Hill, Communications Coordinator at Global Reporting Initiative