Skip to main content
Regulatory Council
Promotional banner for the pentest readiness checklist
Category: Disclosure & Financial Reporting

Non-Financial Disclosure

Also known as: NFD, Non-Financial Reporting, ESG Disclosure
Simply put

Non-financial disclosure is the practice of a company reporting information about its performance and impact that does not appear in traditional financial statements. This typically covers areas such as environmental, social, and governance (ESG) matters, which can still affect how a business performs and is perceived. It gives stakeholders a broader picture of an organization beyond its financial figures.

Formal definition

Non-financial disclosure refers to the structured reporting of business information that is not primarily captured in financial statements but that may nonetheless bear on organizational performance, impact, and stakeholder assessment. In many frameworks it centers on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) dimensions, and encompasses the process of gathering and disclosing data on matters such as environmental performance and carbon-related impacts, social and ethical conduct, and governance practices. As a governance-oriented practice it often intersects with compliance where jurisdiction-specific reporting obligations apply; the specific content, format, and mandatory versus voluntary status of such disclosures vary by jurisdiction, sector, and applicable regime, and organizations should verify the precise requirements against the primary sources and standards governing their situation.

Why it matters

Non-financial disclosure has become a significant governance concern because financial statements alone often provide an incomplete view of an organization's performance, impact, and exposure to risk. Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) matters can materially affect how a business performs and how it is perceived by investors, regulators, customers, and other stakeholders. By reporting on these dimensions, organizations give stakeholders a broader basis for assessment than financial figures alone allow.

The practice sits primarily within governance but frequently intersects with compliance, since a growing number of jurisdictions impose reporting obligations covering environmental performance, social and ethical conduct, and governance practices. Whether such disclosures are mandatory or voluntary, and what specific content and format they must take, varies by jurisdiction, sector, and applicable regime. Organizations operating across borders may face overlapping or divergent requirements, making it important to verify obligations against the primary sources and standards that govern their particular circumstances.

Beyond regulatory considerations, non-financial disclosure can influence stakeholder trust and organizational reputation. Because the information reported often touches on matters such as carbon-related impacts and supply chain conduct, the quality and reliability of disclosure processes can itself become a governance and risk consideration. This publication does not assert any specific penalty regimes or figures; readers should treat mandatory status and enforcement consequences as jurisdiction-specific matters requiring verification against applicable law.

Who it's relevant to

Governance Professionals and Boards
Because non-financial disclosure is a governance-oriented practice concerned with how an organization reports its broader performance and impact, boards and governance professionals have an interest in ensuring that reporting structures, oversight, and decision rights around ESG matters are appropriately defined.
Compliance Officers
Where jurisdiction-specific reporting obligations apply, non-financial disclosure intersects with compliance. Compliance officers are relevant to the extent that they help identify applicable requirements and verify that disclosures meet mandatory expectations in the relevant jurisdictions and sectors.
Investors and External Stakeholders
Non-financial disclosure gives investors, regulators, customers, and other stakeholders a broader picture of an organization beyond its financial figures, supporting assessment of environmental, social, and governance performance and impact.
Sustainability and ESG Reporting Teams
Teams responsible for gathering and disclosing data on environmental, social, ethical, and governance performance are directly involved in operating the reporting process, including data on environmental performance and carbon-related impacts.

Inside NFD

Environmental Information
Disclosures relating to an organization's environmental impact, which may include matters such as greenhouse gas emissions, energy and resource use, waste, and climate-related risks. The specific metrics and their applicability typically depend on the jurisdiction, sector, and applicable reporting frameworks.
Social and Employee Matters
Information addressing workforce, labor practices, human rights, health and safety, diversity, and community or stakeholder considerations. The scope of what must be reported often varies by jurisdiction and by the framework or standard adopted.
Governance Disclosures
Information about the structures, roles, and decision rights through which the organization is directed and controlled, which may include board oversight of non-financial matters, anti-corruption and anti-bribery measures, and related policies. This element frequently overlaps with the governance pillar of GRC.
Policies, Due Diligence, and Outcomes
Descriptions of the policies an organization pursues on non-financial matters, the due diligence processes applied, and the outcomes or results of those policies. Some frameworks encourage explaining where a policy is not pursued rather than mandating one, though this convention varies.
Risk-Related Content
Identification and discussion of principal non-financial risks and how they are managed, connecting the disclosure to the organization's broader risk management processes. Here a risk is the potential event and its effect on objectives, distinct from the controls used to modify it.
Reporting Framework or Standard Reference
An indication of the framework, standard, or methodology used to prepare the disclosure. Applicable references vary widely by jurisdiction and sector, and framework language typically evolves across editions, so the basis of preparation is often stated for clarity and comparability.

Common questions

Answers to the questions practitioners most commonly ask about NFD.

Is non-financial disclosure the same as sustainability or ESG reporting?
Not exactly. Sustainability and ESG (environmental, social, and governance) reporting are often the most prominent components of non-financial disclosure, but the broader concept typically encompasses a wider range of qualitative and forward-looking information, such as governance arrangements, business model descriptions, risk factors, and human capital matters, that does not fit neatly into conventional financial statements. Treating the terms as interchangeable can cause organizations to under-scope their obligations. The precise boundaries vary by framework and jurisdiction, so the applicable regulatory or standard-setting source should be consulted to confirm what falls within scope.
Does 'non-financial' mean the information has no financial relevance or need not be reliable?
No. The label 'non-financial' refers to the type of information rather than its importance or financial consequence, and it can be misleading. Much non-financial information, for example, climate-related risks or governance failings, may have significant financial implications and can be financially material. In addition, non-financial disclosures are frequently subject to expectations of accuracy, consistency, and, increasingly, external assurance. The term describes information sitting outside traditional financial statement line items, not information that is optional or exempt from rigor.
How does an organization determine what non-financial information is material enough to disclose?
Materiality assessment is central to scoping non-financial disclosure, but the approach depends on the framework applied. Some frameworks emphasize 'financial materiality' (information relevant to investors' decisions), while others apply 'impact materiality' or a combined 'double materiality' lens that also considers the organization's effects on people and the environment. Practically, organizations often engage relevant stakeholders, map topics against their strategy and risk profile, and document the rationale for inclusion or exclusion. Because the concept of materiality is defined differently across frameworks and jurisdictions, the specific criteria should be confirmed against the applicable source, and contested judgments may warrant professional advice.
Which internal functions typically own or contribute to non-financial disclosure?
Responsibility is commonly shared rather than held by a single function. Governance oversight often rests with the board or a designated committee, while day-to-day preparation may involve sustainability or corporate responsibility teams, finance, legal, risk management, compliance, human resources, and operations, depending on the topics covered. Because data frequently originates outside the finance function, organizations often establish clear ownership, data-governance controls, and sign-off processes to support consistency and reliability. The specific allocation of roles varies by organization size, sector, and reporting framework.
What controls help support the reliability of non-financial disclosures?
Organizations often extend internal control disciplines used for financial reporting to non-financial information, adapting them to the data involved. Typical measures include documented data definitions and methodologies, controls over data collection and aggregation, evidence retention, review and reconciliation steps, and management sign-off. Where external assurance is sought or required, an audit trail supporting reported figures and narrative claims is generally important. No control set can guarantee the accuracy of every disclosure, particularly for estimates and forward-looking statements, so the design of controls is usually calibrated to the risk and materiality of each topic.
How can an organization prepare for evolving non-financial disclosure requirements?
Because standards and regulatory expectations in this area continue to develop and vary across jurisdictions, organizations often adopt an anticipatory approach: monitoring applicable frameworks and legal developments, mapping their current reporting against likely requirements to identify gaps, strengthening underlying data systems, and building governance for review and sign-off. Aligning voluntary reporting with recognized frameworks can ease later transitions, but organizations should verify which requirements are binding in their jurisdiction and sector, as applicability differs. Interpretation of specific legal obligations may require professional advice.

Common misconceptions

Non-financial disclosure is entirely voluntary and carries no regulatory weight.
Whether non-financial disclosure is voluntary or a binding legal obligation depends on the jurisdiction, sector, and size of the organization. In some regimes certain entities face mandatory reporting requirements, while in others such reporting reflects leading practice or voluntary standards. Practitioners should verify applicability against the primary source relevant to their situation.
'Non-financial' means the information has no financial significance.
The label refers to the nature of the information rather than its potential financial consequences. Matters disclosed as non-financial, such as environmental or governance risks, can be financially material and may connect to an organization's objectives and risk exposure.
Disclosing a policy or metric demonstrates that the underlying risk has been eliminated.
Disclosure describes policies, processes, and outcomes but does not by itself eliminate risk or guarantee compliance. A disclosed control or policy modifies risk rather than removing it, and residual risk typically remains after controls are applied.

Best practices

Confirm which disclosure obligations are legally binding for your organization based on jurisdiction, sector, and size, and distinguish these clearly from voluntary standards or leading practice before determining scope.
State the reporting framework or standard used as the basis of preparation, and verify current requirements against the primary source, recognizing that framework language typically evolves across editions.
Connect non-financial disclosures to the organization's risk management processes, distinguishing the principal risks (potential events and their effects on objectives) from the controls used to modify them.
Coordinate across the governance, risk, and compliance functions so that governance oversight, risk identification, and compliance obligations are each reflected accurately without conflating the three pillars.
Where a policy is not pursued or a matter falls outside scope, explain this transparently rather than omitting it, and flag any areas subject to legal interpretation as requiring professional advice.
Avoid asserting that any disclosed control or policy eliminates risk or ensures compliance; use qualified language and acknowledge that residual risk and context-dependent applicability typically remain.
Application Security Isn’t Optional Anymore.